Protestants Against Hitler:
of Martin
Niem~ller,
and Dietrich
A Comparative Study
Karl Barth,
Bonh~ffer
An Honors rhesis (ID 4qg)
by
J. Michael Kendrick
fhesis Director
Ball State University
Muncie, Indiana
May, lq82
S pri ng/l982
Sr C)\\
Trec.x.:-
.k~6 Totalitarianism, by its very nature, attempts to
subjugate any idea, institution, or power that does not
harmonize with the state ideology.
Everything--art,
literature. music, labor movements, even religion--must
conform to a rigorous straitjacket of standards or risk
certain elimination.
In Nazi Germany, Adolf Hitler
effected his control of the state through a merciless
coordination process known as Gleichschaltung.
For the
most part, Hitler was successful in ridding Germany of
his political and cultural foes.
Political parties were
outlawed by the Enabling Act of March 1933; labor unions
were assimilated into the German Labor Front.
Innovative
musicians and artists, denounced as Bolshevists who were
ruining "German" culture, were forced in droves out of
the country.
Leftist opponents, Jews, and other "degener-
ates" who did not fit the pure Aryan ideal were extirpated.
In effect, Hitler attempted to revolutionize German society
through this coordination process, with the ultimate
goal of
"ei~
Volk,
ei~\.
Reich, eit'l. Fuhrer."
One group, however, proved to be unusually recalcitrant:
those church elements united in their disapproval
of Nazi racial policies and in their desire to avoid
incorporation into the state machinery.
In particular,
Protestants who espoused these beliefs and formed the
Confessing Church were among the most courageous resistors
to the Hitler regime.
Rather than retreat into a shamed
silence, they chose to defend the spiritual integrity of
2
traditional Christianity against the intrusions of National
Socialist dogma.
One scholar commented:
In all of Nazi Germany it was only mainline
Protestants, drawing on the capital of four
centuries, who comprised an elite able and strong
enough to resist the new order. The evangelical religionist combined education. knowledge,
special skills, and a firm select position in
German culture.... Inueed, all significant resistance to the regime was tied to the
ability of the Protestant elite to maintain and
reconstitute itself in face of Nazi attem~ts
to destroy it and usurp its prerogatives.~
If the Confessing Church was partly successful in
resistine; Nazi infiltration. i t i s also true that it was
to some jegree quite ineffectual in presenting a consistently solid bulwark of resistance to Hitler.
More
often than not, the church found itself rent by serious
disputes that greatly hampered posi ti've action of any
kind.
A wiue gamut of church leaders disputed issues
concernin€:" the proper relation between church and state,
the plight of Jews, and whether authority should be
obeyed in all circumstances.
Only in rare instances,
such as the famous Barmen synon, did these Protestants
show
tru,~
unanimity.
For the most part, the history of
the Confessing Church was a disjointed one.
United by
their concern about the church's fate under National
Socialism, church leaders had a harder time agreeing on
the specifics of opposition and the proper role of the
Christian in a hostile en'7'ironment.
In attempting to show the diversity of participants
who made up the Confessing Church. three prominent figures--
J
Martin Niemoller, Karl Barth, and Dietrich Bonhoffer-have been selected for analysis.
This approach has an
advantage in that it gives personal, concrete perspectives
that are more readily grasped than the often confusing,
constantly changing actions of the church as a whole.
Although these three leaders 'Nere among the most outspoken
against National Socialism, they reached their decision
to resist in entirely different ways.
Niem~ller.
a
nationalist and former submarine commander, welcomed
Hitler's advent and only gradually realized the threat
the new order posed to the church.
Barth's decision
to oppose Hitler stemmed from both theological rejection
of Nazi doctrine and from left-wing sympathy.
Bonhoffer.
seeing his beloved Germany ruined by the Nazis, entered
a political conspiracy that would eventually claim his
li fe.
Using histories of the church struggle, biographies,
writings, and essays, three issues are examined:
(1)
National Socialism.
How did each person view Hitler and
National Socialism?
How was he politically predisposed
to accept or reject the new order?
What events in his
life highlighted his rejection of National Socialism?
(2) The Jewish question.
treatment of Jews?
How did each person regard the
Did he make a public defense of Jews?
What actual aid did he provide?
(J) Resistance.
How did
each person justify resistance from both a theological
and personal perspective?
taken to combat Hitler?
What actual measures were
Undoubtedly. these questions
4
were crucial ones for those torn between love of country
and senBe of Christian responsibility.
As one will
discover, these matters were not easily resolved by church
1 eaders"
5
A Brief Survey of the Church Struggle
In order to set the stage for the ensuing discussion,
as well as to provide some clarification of terminology,
a brief discussion of the crucial forces and events of
the church struggle is needed.
A detailed analysis of
the Kirchenkampf is not necessary here; essentially,
relations between church and state can be seen in two
phases:
(1) attempts of pro-Nazi groups to win control
of the church, and (2) the state's use of force to insure
conformity and to destroy the church's capacity to resist.
In 1932, Joachim Hossenfelder formed an organization
that called on Protestants to rally around the National
Socialist platform.
Known as the German Christian Faith
Movement, this group attempted to apply Nazi principles
to traditional Protestant doctrine.
German Christians
welcomed the proposed unification of disparate Protestant
elements into one Reich Church; this unification would be
compatable with the leadership principle (Fuhrerprinzip).
In addition, they insisted upon the church's acceptance of
the Aryan Clause,
~
discriminatory policy which would have
dismissed all persons of Jewish ancestry from the clergy.
During the first half of 1933, the German Christian
Movement gained considerable ground.
During the consti-
tutional convention of the new German Evangelical Church,
Ludwig MUller, an associate of Hitler and adviser to the
German Christians, proposed his own name for the title
of Reich Bishop_
Instead, a moderate named Friedrich von
6
Bodelschwingh was elected.
This incident galvanized the
German Christians, who contested the legality of the
elections and harassed Bodelschwingh into resigning after
a brief four-week term of office.
In the reEional synod
elections of July 1933, the German Christians won a smashing victory, capturing three-fourths of the seats.
Two
months later, at the national synod held at Wittenberg,
the German Christians crowned their success by electing
Mliller as Reich Bishop.
An incident in November 1933, however, soon rendered
irreparable damage to the movement.
Speaking in the Berlin
Sportspalast to a capacEY crowd of 20,000, Dr. Reinhold
Krause shocked the audience with his vituperation of
the Old Testament.
Calling the book a collection of
Hstories of cattle dealers and pimps,H1 Krause proclaimed
it to be "one of the most questionable books in the world's
history.H2
Response to Krause's oration was immediate and
severe; thousands of moderate German Christians resigned
their menberships.
Muller, too, was to find his authority
tarnished by the incident.
Nishing to avoid further
trouble, Hitler withdrew his support from the German
Christia:1. Movement and endorsed a "hands-off" policy
in regard to church matters.
Meanwhile, Protestant opposition to Hitler began to
coalesce.
At first, resistance to National Socialism was
endemic and badly or€:anized, but through organizations such
as the Young Reformers' Movement opposition began to be
heard.
The first broadly-based protest group was the
7
Pastors' Emergency League.
Formed by Niemoller in Septem-
ber 193:3. this group pledged to adhere to the tenets of
the Reformation; heresies such as the Aryan Clause were
rejected.
Disgust with strident German Christian prac-
tices caused membership in Niemoller's organization to
expand rapidly.
At its peak, over seven thousand pastors
held memberships.
Two important meetings were held in 1934 that
created a significant, albeit temporary unity in Protestant
opposition.
The birth of the Confessing Church is usually
considered to be the Barmen Synod of May 1934.
Here
delegates rejected the heresies of National Socialism
and proclaimed the Confessing Church to be the true
In October 1934, at
Evangelical Church of Germany.
Berlin-Dahlf~,
the Confessing Church established a Reich
Brotherhood Council to govern its affairs.
Peter Mathe-
son commented, "It appears to be the sole example of a
major public body being established after 1933 against the
wishes of state and party."J
The unity proved to be
illusory, however, and would soon disintigrate in the face
of
inten~al
disagreements and external coercion.
Dismayed by the
fail~re
of the German Christians and
by Muller's inability to bring peace to the Evangelical
Church, the Nazis introduced new measures to subdue
recalcitrant Protestants.
In 1935, the Ministry for
Church Affairs was established.
Headed by Hans Kerrl,
this organization authorizeci the formation of committees
,--------
8
comprised of German Christians, Confessing Church members,
and state officials.
Although these committees were
ostensitly created to iron out major differences,
church leaders realized the advantageous position the
Nazis would hold.
The more conservative elements of the
Confessing Church, mainly Lutherans who perceived resistance to the state as contrary to God's will, reluctantly began to cooperate with the Nazis.
The more
radical "Barmen-Dahlem winE" refused to have anything to
do 'Ni th such commi ttees.
As a result, hosti Ii ti es sur-
faced and the leadership of the church began to pull
apart.
Under the Kerrl ministry, intransigent pastors were
harassed and jailed in greater numbers.
Barth was forced
out of Germany in 1935; Niemoller was imprisoned two years
later.
Severe restrictions and new stipulations were
added.
In 1937, Dr. Friedrich Werner became Director
of the German Svangelical Church Chancellory, a post that
wielded considerable power over church affairs.
In an
audacious move, Werner insisted on having all pastors
swear an oath of loyalty to Hitler.
Amazingly, the Con-
fessing 8hurch agreed to such a measure, wishing only to
add minor stipulations.
The embarrassment of the church
was extreme when Martin Bormann revealed that such oaths were
voluntary.
Even a moderate call for peace issued by the
leadership of the Confessing Church during the :v'Iunich Crisis
was denounced as the work of traitors.
It became increasingly
9
clear that the Confessing Church was losing any semblance
of sign:_ficance.
Indeed, with its leadership silenced
or impr:_soned, and its activi ties under constant scrutiny, the Confessing Church could put up only token resistance during the remaining years of the Third Reich.
The events that transpired as Hitler came to power
forced Protestants to make crucial decisions.
Years of
complacency and lethargy, fostered by a comfortable
relationship between church and state, were now over.
Indeed, men such as Barth, Niemoller, and Bonh6ffer never
imaginec. that they would have to sacrifice pastorates
and theological posts to confront an upstart political
order.
How they reacted to the events of the Kirchen-
kampf and what they perceived as their own responsibilities
will be dealt with in the next three sections of this
paper.
10
MAR'l'IN NIEMOLLER
Karl Barth once said of Martin NiemBller," he embodies
the Evangelical Church, with its distinctive approach and for
all its limitations as an npponent of National Socialism ....
rhere is an abundance of less well-known figures and less
familiar names about which the same thing can be said.
But
NiemBller was the most outstanding of them all, and became to
some ext,ent a symbol." 1
Barth t s laudatory remarks are an
apposite description of this Westphaliam pastor, who emerged
from
rel~tive
obscurity to lead the church struggle against the
machinations of the National Socialists.
Yet NiemBller has often
been the center of controversy, especially among those who find
it difficult to reconcile his ardent German nationalism, similar
to that of the Nazis in many respects, with his mission in the
church.
An examination of this
C~nfessing
Church leader is a
key to understanding the complexity of the church struggle, for
the beliefs Niemoller held were shared by many Protestant church
leaders and the laity itself.
l'he son of a small-town pastor, Niemoller was exposed to
both the Gospel and a strong dose
one of his
~o~
father's~recollections
o~
German patriotism.
In fact,
was hearing Kaiser Wilhelm II
speak on the necessity of adhering to the Gospel and the mission
of "our beloved Evangelical Church.,,2
It was this respect for
church and state, coupled with a longing for the sea, that led
11
Niemoller to the
r'lensbur~-Murwik
Naval 'rraining Collet:Se in 1910.
Achieving success as a cadet, Niem811er was assigned to active
duty two years later.
With the outbreak of World War I, he
served aboard the battleship lhu.ringen, seeing limited action.
Wishing to become more involved in the war effort, Niem811er
applied for a transfer and was appointed for submarine duty in
October 1915.
His first assignment was as Olunior officer aboard
an old, untrustworthy submarine, the U-1.}; his leadership ability
quickly asserted itself, and by the end of the war, Niemoller
commanded his own vessel, the Q-67.
The war, however, proved to be a turning point in his own
outlook on life.
In his autobiography, From U-Boat to PulI2it,
he recounted an incident when his submarine, having successfully
torpedoed a French ship, began firing on the escorts that
attempted to rescue surviving sailors.
This act "lOf "spiri tual
bankruptc~"J troubled Niemoller greatly, and he found himself
questioning its justification in terms of his own faith.
He
remarked, "~his inciden~was the turning point in my life because
it opened my eyes to the utter impossibility of a moral univers~·4
The disintet:Sration of traditional life in Germany was a source
of bitterness and discouragement to Niemoller.
In an effort to
"remain as far apart as the poles from the wirepullers of this
revolution,,,5 he seriously considered the idea of emigrating to
Argentina; his uncle was able to dissuade him from this course of
action and directed him toward the possibility of farming in
Westphalia.
The skyrocketing inflation, however, wiped out
12
Niemoller's pension and prevented him from
worse, he was forced to
his family alive.
de~perate
buyin~
land.
Even
measures to keep himself and
After considering a number of other occupations,
Niem511er turned to the church.
He believed that "the fate of
the nation depended on family life, its schools, and its church
as sources of inspiration for its people,"6 and soon decided to
enter
thE~
ministry.
He enthusiastically began his studies at
Munster University in 1920.
Paying for his education through
sale of his war memorabilia, and through a large gift from his
brother-in-law,? Niem511er was able to complete his studies by
1923.
y(~t
as a curate to a pastor, he was barely able to provide
a sUbsistence living for his family; it was through fortuitous
connections that he was named to head the Westphalian Home Mission,
a social welfare arm of the Evangelical Church.
eight years, initiating several new programs.
He served for
In lQ31, he became
associate pastor, and, shortly afterwards, pastor of St.
Church in Berlin-Dahlem.
Anne~s
In the well-to-do suburb Niemoller
first confronted the emerging National Socialist ideology and the
subsequent Kirchenkampt Soon, the contentment Niemoller found
at St. Anne's would be traded for the oppressions of the Nazis.
Hence it is necessary to examine more closely at this point
both Niemoller and the struggles he faced during Hitler's reign.
Assembli~
a totally satisfactory portrait of Niemoller can
be a trying experience.
Unlike his contemporaries Barth and
13
Bonhoffer, Niemoller did not write extensively; much of his thought
must be gleaned from sermons and public statements.
l'urthermore,
the Engl:_sh biographies of Niemoller currently available (works
by Dietmar Schmidt and Clarissa Start Davidson) are more descriptive than analytical, and have an unfortunate tendency to
~loss
over the more enigmatic features of Niemoller's character.
But,
using Niemoller's limitet writings, these biographies, and other
books on the church struggle, it is nevertheless possible to
explain NiemBller and his views on National Socialism, the
Jewish question, and resistance to the Hitler regime.
~iemolleT
and National Socialism
Perhaps more confusion has resulted from Niemoller's stance
on National Socialism than from any other issue.
that
Nie~6ller
Many claim
was in sympathy with Hitler's plans, and that his
opposition to Hitler was intended to prevent the power of the
church from being usurped by the Nazis rather than to uphold
deep religious convictions.
A particularly infamous press confffence
at the end of '.'lorld War It R;ave impetus to many of these charges,
mainly due to the f8 ct that Niemoller answered questions in
such a way as to suggest that he combatted Hitler for "religious
reasons" and that his treatment in priso.n:1had been exemplary.8
When one examines Niemoller more closely, however, one realizes
how far apart he stood from the diabolical plans of National
Socialism.
To reach this realization, one must distinguish the
14
totalitarian practices of Nazism from Niemoller's nationalism
and
conc€~rn
for the sancti ty of the church and Gospel.
An understanding of NiemcHler's ini tial attraction to National
Socialism requires an examination of his background.
An ideal
place to start is his autobiographical sketch, trom U-Boat_to
.f!:!l£it, which elucidates his nationalistic fervor.
ical perspective
early
19;~O'
2S
From a histor-
well, the book details the hardships of the
s and the bitterness that NiemlHler and his fellow
countrymEm experienced.
LikE~
many Germans in November, 1918, Niemoller was mystified
and shocked at the sudden collapse of the German state.
realized that the war was
nearin~
its conclusion, but he expected
"an end which we could never imagine to be
and bearable issue for Germany.,,9
He had
anythin~
but a happy
Searchin~ for answers to
explain the demise of his b410ved state, he concluded that
"this critical time was chosen by the German people to indulge
in a suicidal orgy of internal strife. ,,10 NiemcHler, believin~
as many people did, adhered to the notion that Germany had been
betrayed by enemies within.
Increasingly despondent over the future of the German
nation, Niembller removed himself from active participation in
his country's affairs.
He openly disdained the Vensailles
"Peace T:-:-eaty," as he referred to it,ll and refused to reconcile
himself wi th the Weimar government.
Niem<Hler was genuinely
concerned about the peril of communist revolution; at one time
15
he considered joining the Freikorps to combat this leftist
threat.
In 1920, while a student at MUnster University, he
organized and commanded a batallion of troops with the intent of
quashing the red troops creating trouble during the Kapp Put§£h.
In his
dt~scription
of the incident,
Niem~ller
noted that "we
were greeted on all sides as liberators from the hell of bolshevism ... the behavior of the Spartacists had been shocking."12
Although the threat dissipated within a few weeks, Niemoller
remained active in a German national student movement, devoting
to it much of his time.
But Niemoller often brooded about the
fate of Germany in the tumultuous Weimar era, doubting whether
Germany had the leadership and resolve to emerge as a cohesive
nation.
In this light, then, one may more readily understand his
possible attraction to National Socialism.
In examining the works
of several authors, one finds four points consistently emerging
as reasons why Hitler gave hope to discouraged Germans such as
Niem511er:
(1) the Nazis, with their vehement obloquy of Versai-
lles, Weimar, and the "criminals" of 1918, would remove the stigma
of defeat and would replace the paralysis of Weimar government
with strong leadership, (2) outspoken in their opposition to
the left, the Nazis would be an ideal vanguard against communism,
(3) Article 24 of the National Socialist platform promoted
"posi tive Christiani ty," which was construed to be support for
the existence of the church, and (4) the formal separation of
church and state initiated by the Weimar government was anathema
16
to many ehurch leaders, who believed the Nazis would restore the
prerogatives the church enjoyed under the monarchy.
IndBed, Niemoller did regard the Nazis in favorable terms.
It was commonly believed the
party
dUI~ing
Niem~nler
had joined the Naa:i
the 1920's (he later refuted this claim, but
declared that he had voted for Hitler in 1924 and 1929);1~
ncrr was he averse to giving the Nazi salute in public.
And
Hitler gave him little cause for doubt; he declared in his first
public address as chancellor that tithe national
goverrm~nt
...
will offer strong protection to Christianity as the basis for
our coll f~cti ve morali ty. ,,14
Furthermore, there seems to have been
considerable word-of-mouth testimony concerning Hitler's own religiousity.
It was commonly believed, for instance, that the
FUhrer carried a copy of the New Testament with him at all
times. 1 5
Ever gradually, however, the faith that Niemoller placed in
the Nazis began to erode.
Perhaps
h~
first instance of con-
sternation came in 1932 with his contact with the nascent German
Christian movement.
Their blatent demands for racial purity and
Nazi doctrine to supplement traditional Christianity distressed
Niemoller.
Yet he probably regarded this group as
takin~
an
extremist position, not truly representative of National Socialism.
The serious implications of the group's actions were not driven
horne until the church elections the following Yiear.
The German
Christians, touting slogans such as "We are the SA of Jesus
1?
Christ,,,16 and ",sieg heil to Jesus Christ:",l? gained impressive
momentum.
Niemoller attempted to combat their influence by
suP~
orting the Young Reformers' Movement and its "Gospel and Church"
platform, and he also wrote tt1.acts exposing the da!,¥,;ers of the
German Christians.
But Niem511er's efforts were too little
and came too late.
A personal appeal by the Fuhrer, as well
as his opposition's access to the Nazi propag.anda machine, insured
victory.
The July 23, 1933, elections resulted in a landslide,
with German Christians seizing over three-fourths of regional
synod representation.
It was increasingly apparent to Niemoller
that, instead of restoring the church, National Socialism intended
to absorb it.
Niemol:ber's
next effort to stem the tide of this heretical
Christianity was the formation of the Pastors· Emergency League.
'rhe galvanizing factor in its organization was the passage of
the Aryan paragraph in the Old Prussian Synod.
Niemoller believed
it was necessary for the opposition to become org;anized more
effectively than had hitherto been attempted.
On September 21,
1933, Niemoller mailed to several thousand pastors a Four-point
pledge which urged them to adhere to the Scriptures and the
confessions of the Reformation· J it
of the Aryan Clause.
a\~
called for the rejection
rhe response to the atrcular was over-
whelming; by the end of the year membership exceeded 6000.
This
massive rejection of the spate of National Socialist doctrine
w~
a key factor in preventing the Aryan Clause from being adopted by
the National Synod at Wittenberg.
18
In all probability,
was dashed in a
,January 1934.
meetin~
Niem~ller's
last hope for reconciliation
between church leaders and Hitler in
from many accounts, it appears that until th is
event Niemoller believed that Hitler was not truly aware of the
situation and, once informed, would rectify the injustice created
by the German Christians.
sunport Jf Hitler was still
As late as October 1933, Niemoller's
stron~,
as a message sent to the
FUhrer upon Germany's withdrawal from the
Lea~ue
of Nations
shows:
In this decisive hour for folk and fatherland
we .greet our Fuhrer. We give thanks for th is
manly deed and the clear words that aafeguard
Germany's honor. In the name of 2500 Evan~elical
pastors who do not belong to the German Christian
Faith Movement, we pledge our true support and
prayerful thou~hts ,1.3
The purpose of Niem511er's meeting with Hitler was to iron out
major differences between the Nazi-backed Reichbishop Ludwig
Muller and major Evangelical Church leaders; as head of the
Pastor's Emergency
Lea~ue,
Niemoller held a position associated
with the more traditional church.
Just as the meeting
commen~ed,
Hermann Goring burst into the room and announced to Hitler that
a te1enhone conversation between Niemo1ler and another nastor
revealed the former's complicity in an assassination plot to
disnose of the l'lihrer.
Anparently, and accounts of this incident
conflict, Niemoller or his secretary had jokingly commented on
Paul von Hinden8erg's influence on Hitler, stating that the
venerated president was
goin~
to administer last rites to him.
19
outraged, Hitler
launcb~d
a long tirade
castigatin~
Niemoller
and his ehurch associates for their continuous strife and dis10ya1ty to the German people.
As the meeting was drawing to a
close, Niem5l1er reportedly stated boldly that he, too, had a
responsibility to the German people and that
anyone else could
take it away.19
neithe~
Hitler nor
It has been said that
this audacious response was one of such rarity that Hitler
probably never forgot it. 20
After this disheartening experience,
ingly intransigent toward the Nazis.
Niem~ller
grew
increa~
His sermons became more
militant in their defiance of National Socialist practices.
instance, in the week following the SA
pu~g'e,
For
Niem51ler read
the Ten Commandments in place of the traditional liturgy,
pausing significantly after the words, "Thou shalt not kill.,,21
He also refused to coonerate with Hans Kerrl, Minister of
Chu~ch
Affairs, in the latter's effort tb impose totalitarian control
on the Evangelical church.
toll for his opposition:
Of course, the Nazis extracted a
his activities were
scrutin~zed
by
the Gestapo; his house was bombed and ransacked; he was
arrested from time to time; and he was banned from preaching.
In July 1937 the former war hero and esteemed patriot was arrested
on charges of high treason.
He would not see freedom until his
liberation eight years later.
If National Socialism had made no other pretense than a
desire for political control, it is doubtful that NiemtHler
20
would have played any role of resistance.
Essentially, the former
submarine commander shared the nationalistic aspirations of the
Nazis.
But when the new order threatened the authority of the
Evangelical church, perverted the Gospel, and destroyed the
sanctity of the individual, Niemoller painfully realized that
all similarities ended there.
He felt no other recourse than to
oppose the new order for the sake of a higher one.
Niemoller and the Jewish Question
Often considered a troubling point in evaluating the character of Niemoller was his attitude toward Jews.
Perhaps much
of the confusion results from the fact that contradictory and
inconclusive evidence clouds the nicture.
One can say with
reasonable certainty that Niemoller was not a rabid anti-Semite
in the National Socialist manner, but, in his own words, he
considered himself "anything but a philo-Semite.,,22
His own
actions toward the Jews were riddled with ambiguity and could be
described as lukewarm at best.
Fir'st of all, it should be emphasized that anti-Semitism
was not an uncommon characteristic of Germans.
Branding the
Jews as an inferior, troublesome race was not a new concept that
Hitler inculcated in the minds of the people; the latent tendency
toward a.nti-Semi tism had been present for centuries.
Stori~es
of
Jewish greed and econamic manipulation, as well as those associating the Jews with the events of 1918 and the emergence of the
Weimar Hepublic, were commonly accepted as truth.
Pastor Franz
Hildebrandt, an associate serving with Niemoller at Dahlem,
21
believed that Niemoller may have practiced a conventional sort
of anti-Semitism, which condoned social aloofness and discouraged
. t ermarrlage.
.
23 Considering the traditional characteristics of
ln
Niemoller's background, this statement appears to be plausible.
In a sermon entitled "Ye
would not!" Niemoller gave a
rare insight into his perception of the Jews, based on his own
Christian beliefs.
What is fascinating is Niem611er's comparison
of the Jews' rejection of Christ with characteristics of National
Socialism:
We see a highly giftedl people (j;he Jew~ which produces
~iilidea after idea for the benefit of the world, but
whatever it takes up becomes poisoned, and all that it ever
reaps is contempt and hatred because ever and anon the
world no~~ces the deception and avenges itself in its
own way.
Later, he adds,
I cannot help saying quite harshly and bluntly that the
Jewish people came to grief and disgrace because of its
positive Christianity .... It bears a curse because it
rejected him and resisted him when it became clear that
Jesus of Nazareth would not cease calling to repentance
and faith, despite their insistence that ~hey ... belonged
to a pure blooded, race-conscious nation. 5
other parts of this sermon indicate that Niemoller espoused an
attitude that the Jews were responsible for their plight, and
there was nothing that could be done to mitigate God's judgment. 26
Given his own Christian perspective, this sort of fatalism may
explain Niemoller's half-hearted desire to hel? the Jews.
On the positive side, one finds instances of Niemoller's
compassion for the Jews.
One of the more prominent pieces of
evidence involves point four of the pledge of the Pastors)
22
Emergency League, which declared that the Aryan Clause was a
violation of a Christian confessional stand.
Arthur C. Cochrane
believes that the reason behind Niemoller's inclusion of this
important point was his realization that "Antisemitism struck
a blow at the heart of the Christian faith ....
It was a
recogn~
tion of the indissoluble unity of Israel and the Church, of Jews
and Chri~;tians.,,27
Hildebrandt, himself of Jewish origin,
concurs:'(. .
------./
~When it became a question of tneating Jews as second-class citizens, of taking their jobs, property, lives, he came to their
defense and fearlessly so.,,28
Hildebrandt, who at one time was
serving in England wi th Bonhb'(:'fev " was summoned back to Germany
by NiemoJ.ler.
Despite the increa:singly hostile atmosphere toward
.Tews, "Niemoller showed his contempt for the anti-Semi tic views
of the Nazis ... in demanding that I come back ... ,,29
Another
consideration in weighing the evidence is the substantial sums
of money Niemoller solicited, much of which was earmarked for
aiding
JE~wish
families; a Gestapo raid on Niemoller's home after
his imprisonment had been conducted because of rumors that his
family had been storing provisions for Jews. 30
SomE~
evidence rerm ins, however, to support an opposi te view.
biographer, Eberhard Bethge, claims that Niemoller
was hesistant about a binding rejection of the Aryan Clause, wishing
to leave it as a matter of individual conscience. 3l
Bethge also
states that "NiemBller admitted the possibility of reconciling
--_
..•..
__
...
.....
----......
......
_-----_
...
23
the exclusion of Jewish Christians with I Cor. 8 and the concept of the weaker brethren.,,3 2
And, after the war, at least
one Jewish rabbi protested against NiemHller's visit to the
United States, claiming he was still in sympathy with the antiSemitism of the Nazis. 33
Moreover, a further demonstration of
this ambivalence toward the Jews can be seen in a comparison
wi th Barth and Bonhoftt(",
Both of his two contemporaries found
anti-Semitism offensive to the nature of Christianity and unflinchingly voiced their protests in several writings and conversations.
In contrast, one can find very little evidence of any significant
protest in Niemoller's sermons or dialogues against Hitler's
ruthless treatment of Jews.
Niemoller's silence could be inter-
preted as hesitation, lack of concern, or both.
Reaehing a conclusion about Niemoller's convictions on the
Jewish question is not an easy task.
The lack of conclusive
evidence further complicates matters, and answers based on extrapolation may fail to do justice to
N~em~ller.
But one may venture
to say that Niemoller's particular difficulty lay in a deeprooted clash of traditional and Christian values.
On the one
hand, Niemoller shared with his countrymen a mistrust of Jews
that condoned anti-Semitic practices.
His faith, on the other
hand, caused him to perceive the need of demonstrating the love
of Christ to his persecuted brethren, even though he would
bave avoided that obligation.
rath~
24
Niem811er and Resistance
--------..:::~"--'~-'-=...;..
Niem511er probably never
imag~ned
th~t
his first nrotests
German Christicm
against the revolting practices of the
would thrust him into the role of a leader of the resistance
to Nazism.
Certainly his initial loyalty to Hitler and the
new order made any such opposition semm unlikely.
timid Protestants began to toe the
But as more
line, Niem51ler became
Na~i
a central figure in the shrinking core of resisters, and would
become a:1. ever- uresent thorn in the si<±e of the National Socialists who wished to subjugate the church.
One point that is repeatedly stressed by some authors is
that NiemBller's resistance was never political in the sense that
it tried to overthrow the government.
perceives
Niemolle~'s
Frederick Bonkovsky
resistance as part of a power struggle
between the Aleichschaltung precepts of the Nazis and the "rhrone
and Altar" tradition of German Protestants, which stressed a
strong, independent church working in a close relationship
with the state.
of the
c~urch's
When the Nazis attempted to destroy the realm
traditional power, the Protestants sought to'
protect their domain. 34
Certainly the pledge Niemoller wrote
for the Pastors· Emergency League said nothing about the i11egitimacy of the state, nor did it encourage any kind of resistance to the
Ftihre~.
And, as noted previously, many church
leaders thought groups such as the German Christians were part
of a lunatic fringe, overzealous in their devotion to Hitler.
25
At least initially, resistance
~ch
a rear-guaro action, with Niemoller
as
Niem~ller's
hODin~
was basically
that Hitler woulo soon
restore the old system and ways.
As it became clear that the
~erman
Christian Movement's
attempt to subvert the church from within was doomed to failure,
the Nazis exerted external pressures to strane;le traditional
Christiani ty.
The Ministry for Church Affairs, loyal ty oaths
to Hitler, and more frequent harrassment and arrest of church
officials were manifestations of this policy.
But as oppression
became mere overt, resistance became emboldened.
Niemoller's
most effective wearon during this period was his sermons.
rhey
were particularly anathema to the Nazis because they not only
flatly rejected National Socialist
do~a,
but also founn a
receptive audience in the large numbers of ueople who came to
hear him.
An examination of his sermons reveals that Niemo'ller
rarely, if ever, attacked the Nazis directly, but used Scripture
to convey subtle yet unmistakable
messa~es.
One of his homil ies,
entitled "The Dumb Spake," clearly compares the Nazis to ae;ents
of Satan discussed in the Newrestament. 35
Other messages encourap;e
members to rejoice in persecution and remain steadfast in their
faith.
Realizing the potential threat that these messages could
stir, Reich Bishop MUller, am, later Kerrl as well, banned
Niemoller from the pulpit on several occasions.
rheir efforts,
however, often came to naught because of wide protest
their actions.
a~ainst
26
, that constantly
One special problem '
bedevil ed the
Naz~
was the pastor's esteem and popularity.
Un-
like many of their oppone"lts, the Nazis could not brand Niemoller
as a Marxist or degenerate; his impeccable war record and rightwing symnathies
persiste~
~ained
hi~
many admirers.
And as NiemBller
in his opposition, the Nazis began to realize the
danger hE! represented.
Hans Gisevius comme"lted:
For this reason his arrest in the middle of 193? had
a significance that went far beyond the conflict of the
church. ro my mind, Niem6l1er's incarceration removed
the last personality around whom any sort of civilian
revolt movement might have gathered.3 6
Indeed, on the day of his arrest, Niemoller's church was locked
up, and a near riot resulted when parishoners refused to disperse as ordered.
His trial eight months later was a viable
demonstration of Niem5ller's esteem;
a~ainst
three witnesses for
the prosecution, Niemoller's lawyers had assembled over forty
persons, including a sister of Hermann G'JnV\3
' Ambassador
Ulrich von Hassell, and Admiral otto SChultz.3?
favoring Niemoller was so lopsided that the
The evidence
char~es
of high
treason were reduced to "abuse of the pulpit for political
purposes., ,,38 Niemoller received a light fine and was officially
set free., scoring a short-l i ved triumph.
Upon hearing the verdict, Hitler was so outraged that he
made Niem6ller a personal prisoner.
of a
conc~~tration
But even in the isolation
camp, he continued to be a troublesome indi-
vitfrual for the Nazis.
Numerous intercessory prayer services
were held in his behalf in Germany and abroad, so much so that
--------------_....
27
he was thought to be the "most-prayed-for-man in history."J9
Davidson claims that popular pressure prevented the Nazis from
executing him.40
Also, his family was able to obtain improve-
ments in his living conditions when stories of his mistreatment
became r:Lfe.
Niemcnler stated after the war that, relatively
speaking. he had been treated well.
But even beyond that,
Niem8ller must have realized that public opinion saved his life.
One unusual incident should be examined.
'Ilhen war broke
out in lQJ9, Niemoller requested that his commission in the navy
be reactivated so that he might become Dart of the war effort.
Although his offer was rejected by Field Marshal
Wilhelm Keitel,
the incident was significant in that it created a furor in the
Confessing Church and with leaders abroad.
that Nien6ller had sold out to the Nazis.
Many were convinced
Some authors specu-
lated that one motive may have been a sense of duty to the fatherland,
bu'~
others contend that it was an attempt to seek and enter
some sort of political resistance, much in the same way that
Bonhof'·fer- , did.
"Niemoll(~r
Bethge casts doubt on the cons pi racy theory:
later acknowledfSed that he would not have associated
himself with Bonhoeffer's
been set free.,,4l
en~agement
in conspiracy, if he had
Bethge also adds, "It was quite a usual thing
for loyal confessing pastors to volunteer ... so as to find a way
out of a dangerous situation.,,42
Niemoller's curious act has
never been explained satisfactorily and will likely continue
to be a source of controversy.
28
NiemBller may have been a more integral part of the
resistance than even he realized.
His outspokenness and
unquestionable integrity were a source of encouragement
to disheartened Christians.
Add to that his status as war
hero, and one can perceive the difficulties the Nazis had
in silencing the resolute pastor.
Although reluctant
to fight for anything outside the realm of the church,
he gradually realized the threat that National Socialism's
very existence posed.
In the words of Ernst Helmreich.
Niemoller realized "that in a totalitarian state all
opposition in the end becomes political opposition. ,,43
In the final evaluation. Niemoller remains an elusive
figure.
His belated rejection of National Socialism and
ambivalance toward Jews remain puzzling features.
Part
of the enigma can be explained by his desire to see Germany restored as a unified nation and a world power--a
desire that blinded him to the uglier features of the
new order.
Undoubtedly,
Niem~ller
confused and misled his
followers with his antagonism toward Nazi intrusion into
church affairs. which contrasted sharply with his approval
of Hitler's foreign policy and the remilitarization of
Germany.
Ultimately. though. Niemoller felt obligated to
shelve his nationalistic ideals to defend spiritual ones.
Indeed.
Niem~ller's
opposition to Hitler was a tremendous
benefit to the Confessing Church. for it sorely needed
his esteem as war hero and his blunt criticism of Nazi
injustices to encourage more timid believers.
29
KARL BAR'rH
A full discussion of the
not be limi ted to the
si~nif:i.cance
Ki!'.£t!:!~.l11sg!!!.Ef.
of Karl Barth may
As perhaps the most influ-
ential theologian of the twentieth century, Barth rebelled
a~ainst
theolo~y
decades of liberal
thought.
that had dominated Euronean
In the political realm, too, Barth's views on nuclear
armanent and co-existence with communisn stirred controversy
in the Cc Id 'liar era.
But
j
t was in the confrontation between
the Confession Church and National Socialism that Barth
as an uncompromising leader.
As the leading intellectual force
behind church elements opposing Hi tIer, Barth combined
forward declarations of Christian purpose
of the encroachments of
emer~ed
~ational
'.'11th
Socialism.
stnii:~ht­
a total rejection
His outspokenness
at times posed substantial risk; many church leaders considered
him a threat to their own existence.
Yet Barth was of inesti-
mable value to the
for his own determined
oDposition
Confessin~
~alvanized
a
Chu~ch,
fra~mented
church resistance.
Barth was born into a Swiss family steeped in religious
tradition.
His father, Fritz Barth, was a Reformed minister
and university lecturer at Bern; several other ancestors had
also served as pastors.
As a youth, KaTl demonstrated a
proclivity for history, military matters, and drama.
At the
age of eighteen, he began his theological studies at the
University of Bern.
Here he came under the influence of liberal
)0
theologi~ns,
most notably Adolf von Harnack, Hermann Gunkel,
and Wilhelm Herrma:1n.
Barth read their works avidly and
iuentified himself with their thought.
lollowine his ordination, Barth became pastor at Safenwil,
a small Swiss village.
Eberhard Busch, Barth's biographer,
believes that the new minister was not especially popular
despite his earnest efforts to draw new members. l
Part of
the reason for his unpopularity was undoubtedly his involvement
with labor movements.
Barth's sympathy for the workers and
his star..ds on social issues earned him the sobriouet of "the
red pastor.,,2
One member of his congregation, an industrialist,
left thE' church because of the pastor's poli tical meddlin!?;.
Barth even considered joining the Social Democratic Party,
but demurred because of his clerical status.
World
~ar
I was a shattering blow to Barth.
paCifist, he was greatly dlsillusioned by the
af
worke~s'
An
avowe~
~isinte'::;Y'2t1()n
and socialists' cohesion and the failure to resist
statement issued by ninety-three theologians, among them
Harnack and Herrmann,
war effort.
whi~ch
plec1ged therr, to suppo"'t the Kaiser's
Comparing their actions to a "twiliGht of the
,sods."J Barth thought his former teachers to have been "hopelessly
compromise~
by what he
re~arded
face of the ideology of the war. ,,4
as their failure in the
Leeply troubled, Barth
was forced to re-examine his entire system of beliefs and
31
be~an
a serious study of the Bible.
also joined the Social DeJ:lOcrats
During this time, he
despite their
failures, hoping to add his leadershin to the
ear~ier
of a
rebuil~ing
cohesive party.
In 1919, Barth completed a book that "landed litee a bombshell in the playground of the theologians."5
l'he book, an
elaboratl:? commentary on faul' s letter to the Pomans
m~.I
Rom.§EQIi:3f) was revolutionary in its rejection of nineteenthThe chaos of the First World
century theological thought.
War had revealed the futility of liberal theology, with
emphasis on man's
c~pabilities
and
r~tionalism.
0:
brief, Barth stressed the "whollv'- otherness
----imnossibility of p:acing
Hi~
Gor3" ann the
in straitjackets of human thought
What was needed. Barth believed, was a return to the
G00
i~s
as the sole source of gu: dance.
Barth'
~3
wor~
of
commentacy was
an overni.ght sensa:ion. especially in Germany, and brought
a great deal of acclaim and much controversy to the young
Swiss pastor.
degree.
'No~'k
.
Despite e'1OTI1OUS pressures, Barth succeeded in his
=''1i8 period in 3arth' s Ii:'e
W3,S
also ext r er'lely .!."ruitfu:.
conjunction with theologians such as Eduardrhurneyson anr.
JJ
re£;arned "Barthian prose ... as one of the worst kinrls of
anti-!'laz!_ literature.,,6
Barth's candor ann keen percepti0ns
mincen few words and made even fewer people comfortable.
Few
would deny the importance of his early diagnQsis of Hitler's
deceit. and his courage in proclaiming his
thou~hts
publicly.
Clarence Abercrombie said of Barth, "He hated to be penned
down--especiallY in his politics.
And indeed it is difficult
to get a solid grip on the man."?
Although Abercrombie's
statement contains a great deal of truth when one surveys
Barth's life, it is also true that Barth displayed a good
deal of consistency in political endeavors, especially during
the era of the Third Reich.
It is therefore possible to make
some general statements on Barth's conflict with the Nazis.
Such statements concern (1) his early rejection of National
Socialism, (2) his recognition of its totalitarian features,
(3) his comments on its religious nature, (4) his identification
of Nazism with liberal theology, and (5) his personal
l~ift-
wing political rejection.
First of all, it is
a~,arent
that Barth rejected the
National Socialist ideology from his very first encounters
with it.
Witnessing the
~azis'
emergence during the 1920's,
Barth commented that their ideas and leadership were ''absurd/!
but
late~
regretted not warning others concerning the course
on which Germany was headen. S
An article appeared in a Zurich
newspaper in 1931, in which he described the dangers of fascism. 9
34
In general, however, Barth did not become extensively concerned
with the political realm until lQJ3.
Hitler's appointment as
chancellor riveted his attention and forced him to express his
forebodin~s
publicly.
Statements Barth made followi!lg Hitler's
appointment exnressed his fear that National Socialism's aim
was the eradication of Christianity.
tracts,
~~he
Many of Barth's influential
most important of which was 'rheologische
E?Sist~n~
heute, appeared in 1933; their publication came at a time when
less circumspect colleagues still failed to realize the diffep..
ence between the new totalitarian and old authoritarian orders.
Secondly , it can be implied that Barth fully understood
the concept of a totalitarian state and the tactics employed
to crush autonomous units of power within that state.
His
observations were unusually astute when juxtaposed with those
of other church leaders who lacked Barth's political sophistication.
In the summer of lQ35, he wrote:
Vlhe::l National Socialj sm gainpd its long desi red or
feared power in Germany in the spring of 1933, it
proved immediately to be a tyranny of previously
unheard dimensions ... There was at once no sphere
of life on which it did not make demands ... 'fhe
political parties, commerce, administration, and
justice, art, the universities ... the nr'ss, public,
and private welfare ... £Bve submitted to its demands,
because they had to ... .
Two years later, in an article published in a Zurich newspaper,
Barth described how the Nazis were methodically dismantling
the church though suppressing channels of communication.
Their
intent, according to Barth, was "pursuing the plain object of
35
isolating the church so thoroughly and making it so superfluous that sooner or later the justification for its formal
removal will seem evident."ll
Barth was one of the few to
perceive the ulterior motive to the unification of the
Evangelical Church; he saw it as an attempt to impose the
.!::uhre!J2rinz l1?12
Closely related to Barth's totalitarian percent ion of
National Socialism was his recognition of its quasi-religious
qualities.
In surveying Barth's writings and public statements,
one notices his tendency to refer to the new order as a counterreligion and paganistic rite intended to supplant Christianity.
As early as 1931, he ascribed to fascism religious characteristics,
"with its deep-rooted, dogmatic ideas about one thing, national
reality, and its appeal to foundations which are not foundations
at all, and its emergence as sheer power.,,13
Barth also
characterized National Socialism "without a doubt quite different from a political experiment.
. t'l t u t
lns
of
E)
;~nzisn
:ii tler~
2.~)
()
f salvatlon.'
.
,14
. ,!11S
. (eSCrlptlon
d
..
One also notlces
as a new paganism:
a
~;:.;.l~Je
~·:o':""l.
It is, namely, a relieious
and in
he makes numerous references to
0:18
in3t~11ce,
likens those church
leaders clamoring for the application of the FUhrernrinziu
to priests of BQal. 15 During the 1930's, many of Barth's
sermons eontained numerous references to the violation of
the First Commandment, stressing that the Nazis were placing
their own gods before the one true God.
36
National Socialism is also tied closely with the larger
scheme of liberal theology, according to Barth.
As discussed
previously, Barth's 1919 commentary on Romans was a rejection
of this liberal (or, as he referred to it, "neo-Protestant")
theology of the nineteenth century.
Interestingly enough, he
linked National Socialism, and the German Christians in
particular, with the latest manifestation of the theology and
philosophical bankruptcy that had begun with 5ch1eierr.:ncher.
-~otally
transforming life, Barth believed that an e"/en
~l~eater
threat Vias the church's inabili ty to recognize, muc::h less
resist, an enemy within its presence:
Indeed, even a complete "'rannenberg" of the German
Christians, even a hundred percent political victory
in the church by the opposition did not then understand the need to take hold of the roots of the
malady in our church, which has only broken out amongst
the German Christians, but which existed before them
and is not confined to them .... It would have to be
described as a downright national disaster if perhaps
one neo-protestant hierarchy were to belgeplaced only
by another of a somewhat lighter shade!
rhis preoccupation with the larger theological battle is
characteristic of Barth's earlier writings.
His emphasis on
a more contemporary, mundane account of the struggle occurred
later when it became apparent that the Nazis would use their
state apparatus to destroy the church.
Finally, it can be stated that Barth's left-wing sympathies
were hardly compatible with the views of the Nazis.
-------------- ---
His early
37
pastoral work in Switzerland brought him into contact with
workers; he was known for his sympathies with the Social
Democrat~l.
Party (SPD).
In 1931, BQrth joined the German Social Democratic
It was reported that he joined the party more
as a protest against right-wing violence then because of
actual sympathies with its platform.l 7
His party affiliation
was a source of irritation to the Nazis, who only grudgingly
allowed him to continue teaching.
Barth also had a high regard
for demoeracy, which he considered to be compatible with the
principles of Christianity.
Consequently, it is not surprising
to find that Barth was supportive of the Weimer Republic arid
expressed a hearty dislike for German nationalists, whom he
describec. as "the most undesirable of all God's creatures whom
I have ever met. illS
B~cause Barth's political views were
cOMpatible with his theological
obj~tives
to National Socialism,
he experienced none of the misgivings that would hamstring his
colleaguE~s, most of whom were oriented toward the right .19
His early and forceful rej ection of Hitler stems from the fo.:ct
that he did not share common ground with the Nazi
!!elt~.b'§'l!l!Dg.
In r:.ighlighting the chronology of Barth's struggle against
National Socialism, one ideally begins with his seminal essay
i'heolog1:::che Existenz heute (.rheological Existence Today).
Although Barth had
~ade
several anti-Nazi statements that
antedated this 1)ublication, this tract was widely circulated
and propelled him into a leadership role.
Barth wrote in
---,-----------------,----------_.,._-----'----
)8
angry reaction to the resignation of Reich BishoD Bodelschwingh
and the burgeoning influence of the German Christians.
Urging
the faithful to seek the word of God as sole authority, Barth
launched a bitter attack on the German Christians' attempts
to supplement the Gospel with notions of racial supremacy and
anti-Semitism.
The effect of this tract on church leaders
and laity was immediate and tremendous.
One of Barth's
associates, Dr. Arthur Frey, likened the tract to an alarm
call "as has probably not been heard in the Church since the
Reformation. ,,20
Barth himself thought that what he said in
this trnct had not differed from any previous statements, but
that the situation and times had changed drastically.
"':ii thout
ny wanting it, or doinG anything to facilitate it, this had
of necessity to take on the character of a summons, a challenge,
.
,,21
a b a ttl e cry, a con f eSSlon.
Almost overnight. Barth became a leading figure in the
opposition to the }erman Christians.
of July 1033, Barth
ViaS
In the church elections
dismayed with the lack of resolution
demo:1strated by the Young l{eformers
I
T'/lovement. and at the last
minute entered his O'Nn party, ent i tIed. "For the Freedom of
the Gospel."
In spite of its late entry, the fJarty managed
2r)
to cbtai n ten percent of Bonn s votes. ,I
But the Gernar:.
Christi2.ns carried the day, and VIi th the appointment of I'.:tHler
,
.
filS
}J''Jsi t i~
39
While continuing his lecturing and teaching at the University
of Bonn, Barth was asked to draft a thesis for the proposed
synod of the Confessing Church to be held at Barmen-Gemarke.
In conjunction with two other nastors, whose roles were minimal,
Barth wrote a six-article confession that for many defined the
essence of the church's opposition to Hitler.
Unequivocal in
its language, the 3armen Confession re-pudiated the idea of
National Socialism as a revelation of God, stressed the
independence and inteGrity of the church, and the sovereignty
of God.
Unanimously approved by the synod, Barth's text was
hailed as perhaps the most important confession in decades,
even centuries.
The uncomnromising document had been the
strongest rejection of National Socialist principles at that
+'
"lr1e.
Not surnrisingly, Barth began to feel the nressure of
increased surveillance and harassment.
As early as January 1]34,
Y'Uno!'s 0:" his imminent disr:Jissal from Bonn beGan to circulate .23
It was.thought that Barth's failure to c;ive the
~'lazi
salute
:=vanr,elical Church were wishing to !Jlacate Hi tIer wi th a more
conciliatory attitude; .:3arth' S
a hind rance.
h~r(:'-l
Bi shOT) Ilugust fl:aharens
ine approach 'Nas seen as
~)
ta ted that Barth was
in fact the greatest danger to the Evangelical
')4
Church.~
Accordingly, Barth was asked not to attend the Third ConfeSSing
---- -_
..•..
- - - - .-
40
Synod of July 19J5.
The issue that finally forced Barth out of
Gerr1any was his refusal to take an oath of loyalty to Hitler.
Since it was requi red of all s tate offic ials, Barth '.vas
prepared for dismissal at any time.
I'he Provisional
Chu~ch
Government, however, came to his rescue with a declaration that
all oaths were implicitly qualified because actions that were
contrary to the will of God could not be carried out.
these
~he
st~rulations,
~ith
Barth felt that he could take the oath.
Nazis felt otherwise,
Declared to be unfit as a teacher
of German you th, Barth was d iSrLissed fror1 the Bonn facul ty in
Decer~ber
19J1~.
A few months later, he vms banned fror1 all
public sDeaking.
An appeal led to a reversal of the dismissal,
but the Ninister of Cultural Affairs permanently removed him
from his position in June 10J5.
Iru:'lediately,
B(1'..~th
returned to ::>lJitze,::,l8.nd and
a posi tion in the Uni.verf"; ity of Basel.
securi ty of this
neut~'al
VlaS
offeY'cj
FrOfl the relative
nation, he continuerl his unrelenting
attacks on National Socialism.
l.'hrough a series of lectures,
radio broadcasts, ond a lively excha:1ge of
l3ar-th continued in his misf,i.on
0
f
corres~~ondence.
8.'n<1 c:enin--; Lure:: ~:'c
~)
'~;.c
danger of Hitler:
So it came about that despite my desires I had to
persevere in my opposition to National Socialtsm
even after I had returned to Switzerland for the
pre~;ervation of the true church and the just state.
On the account I aM labeled a sort of "rublic enemy
number one" in Germany, and must see231l my writings
nut on the index of forbidden books.
41
Swiss officials did not greatly appreciate Barth's
~ctive
political participation, for such activity conflicted with
their desire to maintain strict neutrality.
Barth's blunt
public statements did little to alleviate the situation; one
such remark blamed Hitlerism for increasing the German people's
natural tendency toward paganism.
was
seve~e,
protest.
The reaction to this comment
as the German ambassador to Switzerland left in
Barth, however, always made a disti.nction between
the German people and the Nazis; at the end of the war, he
urged a conciliatory attitude toward a defeated Germany.
It is indeed fortunate that the Confessing Church had a
man of Barth's stature.
His astute nerception of the nature
of National Socialism was critical because church leaders djd
not rerceive or chose to ignore the dangers.
when
Bar~h
There were times
must have considered himself to be a Cassandra,
a voice crying in the wilderness.
It was to the credit of
Confessing church leaders that Barth was finally heeded;
without
h1;S
forcefulness, the Church might have become easy
prey for the Nazis.
~~rt~~D~L1he~ewish-2Qes~iQD
l'he avowedly raci st pol icies of 'l'hird j{e i ch appall ed
Barth.
But, unl ike the com:.")lacent ind i viduals who taci tly
supportet or ignored this issue
alto~ether,
treatment of Jews as a major problem.
Semitism had reached a
fren~iej
Barth saw the
In a nation where anti-
stage, Barth unequivocally
42
Earth
W8.:3
fully ;ired isposed toward hel TJinr-; the JeVlS rather
early in the
One lone dissenter f('om this vie':! is
strug~le.
Arthur C. Cochrane.
He believes that Barth, caught
the theological aspect of the
stru~gle,
u~
in
perceived the Jewish
problem as a symptom of the latest manifestation of thE- neoProtestant malaise.
afrlressed
proclaMa~ions,
~ot
Barth, accustomed to such
t~e
anti-~eITitic
pliGht of the Jews as a secondary
until the Inter horrors revealed the Nazi's
int ention;~ did Barth devote his at tent ion to -the Jews i"!'1
d
se-:,'ious na:mer.
Barth always tied the ;ewish question to the foundations
of Christianity.
Ee considered Jews to be members of the
same fam:_ly of God.
in which he
discus~'ec1
In December 1 ')33, Barth r:reachecl a SE!!'r!"1on
the fact that Jesus was a Jew, CausinG
some f:1em:)ers of the congregation to leave inrlignantly.
later w;:'(lte that
"anyon(~
vlho bel leves in Chri st, who was hi!Tself
a Je'il, and died fo:c Gent::lf'!s and Jews, simr:ly
contempt fer Jews
a~d
nOVl -the order of U-e day".2?
regret
~
any
concernin~
+
+
sta~emenu
on
~§:DDot
Jews. :·-:3
be involved
ill-treatment of them which is
Busch :3t8.tes that Dae·th's n:l.in
the Barmen Confession was the
+
~he
B?rth
o~:ssicn
Anct in the wake of the
of
pO~;:'OM
43
known as KristaIID§:.2h!, Barth had harsh words ann an admonition.
Declarinl,~_ anti-S~mit~~~
L_l', t 0 b e a sl'n
'+
aea1ns~
th e H
Ie
' ·"t , 20/
0 y
~P1~1
he warned the churches that the "burning of synagogues 'Nas
only the first step to treating the churches in the same wayo,,3 0
Finally, it must be stated that Barth did not provide
mere lip service in aiding Jews.
He was involved in Swiss
groups such as the Society for Aid to the Confessional Church
in Germany.
Barth felt it was a_Christian duty, as well as
a testimony to Switzerland, to provide food, shelter, and
clothing to Jewish emigres.
He wrote open letters to Swiss
citizens as well, urging them to share in this duty.
Succinctly stated, Barth saw a two- fold purpose in
aiding the Jews.
a
hostil€~
One was a need for
Ch~istian
comnassion in
environment, such as in Naz i Germany, or in a
largely indifferent, cnm:::,lacent setting, as v,Tas the case in
Switz.erland.
The second reason was the proximity and inseI1a-
rable bonds that Barth perceived Judaism and Christianity
as sharing.
Barth realized that it was a short step from the
eradication of the Old Testament to the elimination of
tradi tional Christianity.
Durin~
Barth
be~an
regime.
the late IG30's, as Europe moved closer to war,
to advocate open
This position
politic~l
appe~red
resistance to the
Hitl~
to be anomalous with the
pacifistic tendencies he exhibited during World War I.
Yet
44
the extreme threat poseo by Hitler led Barth to choose
resistan::::e as a countermeasure.
In the early plases of the struggle, Earth was not prone
Althou~h
to make extremist proposals.
the obvious errors of Nazi-influence1
quick to point out
~roups,
Barth was quite
reluctant to suggest means of dealing with them.
Confessin~
more radical elements of the
talk of
within.
~3chism
And,
Church, Barth
unli~e
re~arded
as irresponsible and insisted on reform from
Although he
ope~ly
objected to the Nazi political
structure, nowhere in Barth's early writings are there references
to
polit~cal
resistance.
Occasionally, one comes across
"resistance" used in a spiritual context, but haroly in a
physical one.
By J_G38, however, OYle finds Barth advocatinfS a political
dimension to his views on resistance.
concentration on
maintainin~
He regretted that his
the theological purity of the
church hao causeo him to neglect the consideration of Dolitical
opposition.
Barth
increasin~ly
saw such resistance as both
a Christian outy and as a patriotic effort.
rhe theological underpinning of resistance was the comrIe<:
notion of the Grenzfall, or "border case."
believed that
governmen~were
Basically, Barth
ordained by God, and should
never be overthrown by revolution or unlawful means.
45
But in 8ertain
ci~cu~stances,
action had to be taken against
a gover:'1ment that had perverted its earthly purpose.
crombie presents one
Aber-
ex~lanation:
As the body of Christ, the church is specifically
charged by her r.Iaster to proclaim his l..ord~~hi~,
and she nust not allow anything to conflict with
this mission. Therefore, the church may be comnanded
by God to defend this message against strangulation
by an unjust state .... If the state flies in the
face of God's commands, it loses its divine commission,
the base of its very existence; the state ceases to
be a state at all: Jf
rhe -Grenzfall
was not a situation that could be verified
------by emrirical fO!'mulas; the Christian must sten out in faith
if he believed the si tua tion warranted.
rhus, the
.Q£"§D~fall
was a subjective decision that always contained an element of
uncerta:_nty.
Interestingly enough, Barth viewed the July 20,
1944, comsriracy against Hitler as not conforming to the
conditions for a
sums
up
Gren~fall
because of its failure.
Barth's elaborate concept in this way:
John
Yode~
"He has simnly
found a name for the fact that in certain contexts he is
convincE~d
of the necessity of not acting according to the
way God seems to have sDoken in Christ." 3J..
An open letter sent to Professor Josef Hromadka of Irague
was the first significant manifestation of Barth's inclination
toward nolitical resistance.
Written during the Sudetenland
crisis, the letter urged the Czechs to take a stand.
He
declared, "Every Czech soldier who fights and suffers will do
this for us--and I say this without reservation--he will also do
46
for the church of Jesus Christ.
One thing, however, is certain:;
every nossible human resistance must now be nade at the borders
of Cz echoslova:kia. ,,33 Not sur:lrisingly, the letter provoked
a public outcry, especially in Germany.
Barth's renutation
was tarnished by the German nress, vlhich called hin a warmonger,
and by the Confessing Church, which Clublicly dissociated
itself with his stance.
During the war years, Barth's resistance was expressed in
a nUMber of ways.
First, there was the more conventional
public lecture, a tool Barth used extensively in the earliest
days of the war.
In the first months of 1940, he lectured in
several Dutch cities, declaring that war was necessary for the
destruction of fanaticism emanating from Germany.
Made
num~rous
Barth also
radio broadcasts, including some on the BBC
(which were banned in Switzerland).
A more unconventional
means of resistance was military service.
In 1040, Barth
enlisted in the Swiss Army, seeing limited duty and "kee"9ing
a
lookou-~ for Hi tIer's hellish hosts along the Rhine." 3'fBarth
also belonged to a secret
~atriotic
National Resistance Movement.
organization called the
Its purpose was to prepare
Switzerland morally in case of invasion, and to facilitate
military defense and combat defeatism once that invasion started.
Li1CE! so many others, Barth initially limited resistance
to the spiritual realm.
Defending the sanctity of the church
from political intrusion was of utnost importance.
But when
47
the church insisted on fighting no further than its own front
yard, weakened by
i~ternal
squabbling and oblivious to the
plight of others, Barth must have realized the futility of
such a position.
~ational
Socialism was obviously going to
survive with or without such a church.
~olitical
Barth's decision
o~
resistance was undoubtedly a painful one, but one
deer1ed necessary to sto') a menace that threatened humanity.
Much has been said about what Barth did for the Confessing
Church.
church
But, as ;:: :'inal thought, one may consider what the
~3truggle
did' for him.
Theodore Gill observes that
"It was Adolf Hitler who saved Karl Barth's ethics by invading
the sanctuary .... " 35 Indeed, the churc~ s-~rugGle
a
T'urifyi~g
ex:'el~ience
for Barth.
C2,1l
be 3een as
Having observed the fai2.ure
too '1lOu:.d be condemned if he failed to res-;Jond to the grave
challenge of Hitler.
All of his 'Nords about "dialectic theology"
and the "word of God" would have been empty talk.
strugglE~
The church
forced Barth from his ivory towe.r and into the
.,
of a severe test which challenged and refined his faith and
from which he emerged triumphantly.
---------------_._-----_._-
~
mlOS u
48
.r?rorn the earliest days of the Yla tional So cial ist as cens ion
to power up to the collapse of the Third
cons~iracy a~ainst
~eich,
resistance and
Hitler's oppressive regime was manifested in
a rwriad of forms.
Disgruntled indust rial i sts ,~enerals, an:']
lavvyers '.'lere to find theT"lselves joined for the clandestine
nurpose of assassinating the ?Uhrer and coming to favorable
terms
wi~h
the Allies.
Yet it seems almost anomalous to discover
~articipants
that one of the active
in one such consniracy was
a Lutheran pastor named Dietrich Bonh6ffer, a man whose wellknown pacifist convictions and sense of di®ni ty seer1ed unsui ten.
to the treachery of an assassination nlot.
rhe metamorphosis
from young theologian to Confessing Church activist to informant
and cons;;irator against Hi tIe':' remains a provocative in1u try,
and ultinately raises imnortant questions of responsibility
within a Christian framework.
Born in 1106, B5nhoffer was the youngest of
His
fami~y
enjoyed considerable prestige,
to-do suburb of Berlin.
der'artne~1t
were to achieve prominence as well.
physicist at the
Unive~~si ty
executive 1Ni th Lufthansa.
Gerhard Lei bholz,
2.
'Jf
in a well-
~arl Bonh~ffer,
Di_e-'::;cich' s brothe:!:':::;
Karl-~riedrich
Leinzi~,
ch51d~en.
became a
and l=laus becarYJe an
Hi. s twin s i st er Sabine pmrrien.
constitutional lavlYer vlho late,:" became
------------------_ _
..
residin~
Dietrich's father,
at the U:1iversi ty cf Eerli:1.
ei~ht
......
_....-_ ......
49
a jurist in the Federal He'Jublic.
)'Y1ost
W01"1::S
01"l
In exaMining
Bonhriffer, 011e is struck by the intense unity and
cooperation that his family shared.
closenes~3
of the Bonhtlffer family was th'3.t it provided Dietrich
f:~rm
with a
fou2Ylation of
Bonh6ff~r's
break
wi~h
~)astors
that the
rhe significance of the
an rl
S1l.')Y")')1~t
i::-'l the tri"'.ls to come.
decision to enter theological school was a
tradition in his family.
theolo~ians
ex~e::,ience
of
Although
cha:~act8ristlc
~or14
~a1"
brou~ht
of Barth's
,I.:yj
un in a
::iemolls::,':
I, racticula::'ly the death of
his brother '.1ell ter, led B0'lhOfi'er to ~onsi..der the f.1inist r y.l
Bonhoffer entered the
theo10~ical
school at
~Ubingen
in 1023,
where he was attrelcted to the teachings of liberal theologians
such as j,dolf von Earnelck and Adolf Schlatter.
t~_'"'1e
It 'Ins at this
that 30!1hoffer saw his fi rst and last T'1.ili tary -:;"c'erience.
II'Iili tary training of students, de:s'Ji te its dubious legality,
ViaS
a conmon nractice in GerMany (luring the I ')20' s; Bonhoffer
hi!Tlself
~lerved
Reichswehr."
with the Uln Rifles of the so-called "Black
Al thou~h Bonhoffer is said to have enjoyed the
eX;:Jecience, he was dismayed by the "ve-ry reactionary" tendencies
shared by most
Travel was a significant element of Bonhoffer's life.
One such visit was a jOu2·.·ney to Home in l:Y""-1-
~ew
-'jhi Ie he was stll1
50
a student; this exnerience
of the "church."J
interest in the conce]t
awakene~
After cOl'1 n letins; his sturlies at the UniveY'stty
of Berlin, BonhHffer became an assistant pastor to a German
cOMMunity in Barcelona, which arMed
.
1n
n~ac
?;:~ea-'cly
T
r,
~n 1_.:JJ u,
t'lea 1 counse l '1n~ anJ,-'l nreac h'lng.
visiterl the United States
to exnla in the ther)lor;y
C)
~G
to his exnerie'1ce
a Sloan Jellow.
n
h"o~~er
F'
von_
-t:'
Here he sought
f Ba r-'ch, ':'/ho1'1 he now regar'rlerl as
rn.::ticularly that of blacH:s.
(one who lectures without remuneration) at the University of
D
l'
.uer~ln.
Bonh5ffe~
2ron all nccou:1.t s, he was a very popular sl'eaker .
also made his first contact
~ith
Barth,
atten~ins
several of his lectures ann re~retting that he had not mE~ him
sooner. 4 In these few ye.a-;"s before the I:)J J crisis in C1ermany,
BonhHffe r marle his first contacts with a
growin~
ecumenical
movement; the ties he established here would be 0uite valuable
in the later resistance and consniracy.
Very shortly, Hitler's
in his 1 i fe, a n
cOMine to power wouli become a
the next twelve years would be the chronicle oC this
attern,t to rid Gernc::my 0:' the blight of
One vlho investig:.1tes -I..;h8
the innact
o~
;;astor, Bethge
Bethse's work.
~rovides
---------------------------------------
li~e
,~ation3.1
r
]
~astor's
Socialism.
of' 13oYJ.hi-iffe:(' can'1ot escaDe
AYJ. intimate frieni ani fellow
a wealth of information in :"is definitive
51
bioq;ra ;:)hy Qi etri ch_1lQDb.Q~f~tC~_r;:aD-2 f Vis io1l.t. r,1arLQf
In addition, Bethge has ·lritten an
Cos11Y_Q._~§:ce
graphers
abrid~ed
C.Q~.r:gg~.
entitled
biogra~hy
and eeli ted Bonhoffer'::;. Tlrison letters.
acknowled~e
their nebt to Dethge
bu~·add
Other bio-
their
ow~
int ernreta ti ons anrl sOl"1etimes, umlsual formats (for instance,
fheodore Gill's book is
of the
c~urch
w~itten
as a movie scrint).
Histories
struggle are useful to some degree, but not in
the same manner as they are for Barth and NiemBller, since
Bonhoffec's significant actions occurreili relatively late and
were well outside the mainstream of church activities.
sources are useful in
on
a syno-:Jsis of Bonhoffer's views
comt'ilin~
Soci..alism, the .Jewish
~Jational
fhese
Cf~-xestion,
and resistance.
£2.nh 0 ff f.~:_gr!i.Ji at iQr!gl_So .£i§:li sm
Like NiemBller, Bonhoffer exhibited a strong sense of
aY1d pride in Germamy.
patrioti~3m
Bonhoffe~
But unlike his colleague,
was not deceived by the Nazi program.
Alnost iMMediately
after Hitler became chaY1cellor, he vocally exrressed his concern
for Germany and his dis:;ust with the distortions and lies of
an onpressive regime.
Gill has described BonhCiffer as "a vocally proud and grateful ch ild
0
f GeI'!'lany and
Clearly his
u~lJer-class
dignity
his nation.
·~or
3.
cha::lnion of his mi s1.me] e~~s t00(1 l1a t ioYl.".5
backgrouncl instilled in him
...
sense of
Like many other Germa.ns, the Bonhoffer's
endu.red the hardshiDs of ':1 () rIG
--------------_
8-
~.'Ja r
I , losing relatives and a
52
,member of their own family.
Dietrich 'Nas personally enra,csed
by the provisions of the Versailles Treaty; when he visited
New York in 1'130, he went "with a notebook full of arguments
a~8.inst
the.". treaty .. "
reany to 0.0 uattle wi th anyborly on
the Question of GerMan war p,;uil t. ,,6
Just as Niem61ler accented National Socialism as a way
of restoring the
mo~archial
presti~e
of
Donh6ffer
Ge~Rany,
rejected it because of its inability to measure un to his ideals:
It was aristocratic horror at this vulgarization of
his Germany; it was contemDt for the trash that
Dresumed now to be resnonsible for a superb cultural
inheritance. Then as the scabrous outlines of the
new regime became clearer, there was added to
7
Diet:~ich' s clisgust his anxiety for belovsd ~eople.
-,
Dietrich was not the only member of his family to ex?ress
dissatisfaction; the BonhBffers were united in their mistrust
of Hitler"
Karl Bonhoffer recounted:
11'rom the start, the victory of ;~ational Socialism
~l..n 1 ~)~
'"'1 < r_ Ir ~'- eC)~"1
vn1-'~ S ~~()
, J J • • • "/a'"'
, ' ,,) l' n
.
"
1.
•y>-'-une
v '
- - ....Llrl p.' .,1..
" 1.' 1L .-..
'
':':4
,:~.,
'J
fr1.~'"~1_ ~~/
:.t.n8
'l ,~..~ ~,~c~--!
r"i~-:rusted
~~1
-::1-1~.S.
}ritl{::~~
I~~
~:/
~J::;cr_1.~{c~e
A
~:
(';·, . .'"~1
c;_:~.
C,~S?,
r1.!~:~:
~
.~
\:.~
J
l_ ~)~_1.'·~e L
-~ "'''~;-:':'/')<~.,-'
-, -, ,", >-,,,
e
C-. Y'I,:i1 be. . c""" eo'" 1\lhat r" h' aa'crl
from l'rof~ssio;13.1 c()11ea£;,ues about his nsychoT"lathic
symTltoms ..
. , . , ..
;l"'l-'-'
rl Cl
) " . 1 . .......
WI
-L- ,,_, n rO "',
- .... ~J.i;.-- • • • t:t~lU
Abercrombie also refers to
C'
1.
(_v'\.u
B()nh3:fe~'s
•.•
..
..1
t...
uTlper-class
backgroun~
as being a prine cause of his cejection of Hitler, but adds a
theolo~ical
the
id~al
perspective.
He believes that
B~nhoffer
considered
Jf social order and discipline to be of utmost imTlortance.
fhese ideals were based on the nroper relation between God and
man, BuT)erior and subordinate.
1"1e'1 '.le C"P-
);1tro 11 in.cs the s-tate.!"
C1
r~azi
ideolop;y renresented the
53
~e
have already seen how Barth ascribed naganistic luqlities
to National Socialism.
Bonh6ffer anproached the
reli~ious
nature of the Hitler regime in a slightly different manner--he
often perceived the FUhrer as an
age~t
of Satan, a man who
threatened the entire nation by his presence.
Jell claines that
Bonh~ffer we~t
so
f(H~
Bishop
a.3 to call
Hit~ep
1- ,. . .,. -,
removed desnite the cost; the
~estruction
digni ty could mt be tolerated.
1'he
:~aii
3eo~~e
-~)
'oe
of human values
an~
state had corne to
serve Satan by rlemqndinp; VJorshiJ that rightfully belonged to
Eventually, Bonhoffer would sacrifice his own rer-utation
to combat the evil that continued unchecked.
Bonh.offer made h:'s first Dublic statement on
~{ational
Socialisr:1 only tV10 days after Hi tIer becane chancellor.
1'his
radio address, broadcast in Barlin, Marked him iMMediately as
a'1 o:-Q')one'1t of thel'hird
Concept
0
.~eich
.
Entitled "Chan£,es in the
the _;:'uh "':'er," it ir-:')lo red the allc1 i ence to avoirl th e
f
"narcissistic lures" an--:1 "icJolatcy" of the :~azis.12
Inexnlicably,
the broadcast was cut off; whether it was censored by the government or 'vhether he
unclear.
h"'J~
sim-ply over-r-un h1s time limi t is still
But the unfavorable reaction encountered by the
marie him vul'1erable to future
In the
-
har-assment.
Months, BonhBffer became active in the
ensu1n~
.......- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
~over-:1ment
-
~astoY'
54
Le2.'1He.
i~'1cLeasing
But his
iliss8.tisfaction ''vitI'.
~;qzi
!l:)"l.icies,
:,xl::'ticuls.::ly a'1ti-3e'''li tic ():1.es, cause:l hi:n to leave GerT'r)a'lY.
"cu:-inr~
the next two yea::,s, he served
German-sneakin~
con~re~atir;ns.
two iT'l:'ol"tant resul ts .
8.8
Y)3.stor to various
':rhile in E?1€land, he achieverl
?ir,st, he was able to r:ersuade
t~e
]arishes in London to sup-port the Confessing Church, vlhich was
strug~ling
a tremendous victory for that
body in that it beean
to receive recognition in ecumenical circles.
befriended
Jisho~
Del~
, : Chichester, Who was extremely
influential in his own country a'ln in certain
Bell would become an
.--.
sn-;:),,--;o;r't that wl)ul"
Secondly, he
imnorta~t
fi~ure
ci~cles
abroad.
in nromoting international
'tJe l'1.valu::1ble il1 later years .
c0 1,1":ci1s, ')acticularly th0se at Sophia Rnd Fano, Vlere viewed
by the
~azis
B~nh~ffer
Ar~an
as subversive
ex~res3n~
Clau;:;e, and pressed the
~esoluti0~
12S
passed
So cie',l i st practices.
1'<
~
It is true
t~at
his desi:-e for a nublic rejection of the
to condemn anti-SemitiSM.
a
~ission~.
membe~~s
of the Sophia conference
Partly due to BonhHffec's ef:orts,
tha~
flatly rejected the National
I',;oreover, his interna tional:'riend 3hi ns
fostered a better unc1e{'standims of the true situation in
~errnRny.
In nresenti'1.g an insio er' s view of the church si tuation, Bon.'I1of'f8r
WRS
able to uncover the decentions that the Nazi press used to
disguise thp iDternal nroblens.
--..-------------'---
55
1he years
followin~
Lon~on
his return from
of my 1 i f e . ,,14
+'
u.1:'"1e
by B5nhoffec as the "nest f'...tlfilled
His
Rctivi ties \'Jere nainly concerned \,1i th the instruction of
Oneratins a
students.
~escribed
have boen
se~:1in8.ry
cl8.nc1estine 3cho()1 at
r~.-!;'·'8C' ma~-:eshift,
0ubjected
the semin8.ry
by the
o~erated
Ge2ta~o
in
for only two yaars before being closed
~~37.
Bonh~ffer
foun~
hir-elf
un~er
increasins
scrntiny; the follo\'lin::; year he "'as
it beCaMG
bin4i~~
and retcoRctivc for all nastors
to
li33·
atte"1Dts at appeasing Hitler- would 'be
of
or~anized
resolut~on
Cla~3s
B~nhorfe~
Sl~ce
that any
to fTllure.
Eleme:'1ts
resistance, such as the Confessing Church, were
losin~ th0~r ~ill
final
~loc)Mecl
a~~ointe~
c0n~-nnt ~atin~al Socialis~.
to
n~
this
bac1qronn.~
ann.
Dr0ble~
Bonh~ffer's
was political consrirRcy.
l~el ic;ious
attitudes were the cri tical
factors '_n E onhoffe",, s life that ler1 hin to reject :b.tion8.1
Socialisn.
Particularly in the international sphere, he fuse.:i
:J.i:;lomacy and righteous indigml.tio:1 to create a
atnos~here
for the C0nfessine Church.
f~vorable
AlthOUGh B0:1h5ffer
di~
56
the cesolution
Beth~e
Bonh~ffer ~ossessed.
states that B()'1hof':er "may have bee'1 the first t()
see -':;his matter Ghe .Tewish '1.uesti()r0 as the ccucial problem in
~ven I1J)re tha"1 Da::-th, BO'1hoffer saw
the inpendi"1,O; strw:;p;le. ,,15
the persecution of Jews as a nefarious
the nrecepts of
~a~ial
su~eriority.
~ractice
He wrote
and denlored
f~e~uently
on
the subject, and some of his sharnest statements were written
early in the strup;a;le.
I'1deed, few church leaders were as
willing 'ts B()nhoffer to sC)eak out bolr1ly against a nr8.ctice
that was tacitly conconerJ by JTlany Germans.
Fersonal ties
dee~ly
attitude toward Jews.
affected Bonhoffer's sympathetic
In particular, the plight of his brother-
in-lm'l, Gerhard Leibholz, and his friend Franz Hil,iebrandt
home the seriousness of the situ8.tion.
brou~ht
Leibholz, who was even-
tually dismissed from his nost in 1 0 35, was forced to flee
with his family to
En~land.
}[ildebrandt, a
theolo~ian
who worked
closely 'Nith 13onhoffer in earlier days, served with him during
his
L()n~on
nastora~e.
In
1~37,
Hildebrandt was arrested for
his "subversive" association with Hiemol1er.
Un0oubtedly,
13onhoffe:::-' s anxiety for their welfare, as well as the disgust
he felt about legal constraints nlacdd on all Jews, caused him
to
Derce~ve
the problen of anti-Semitism as a critical issue.
57
Bonhoffer was constantly battling the c0l:rrlaccncy o[ church
leaders who wished to sidestep responsibility for Jews.
after the one-day boycott of Jewish merchants in Anril
Shortly
11)),
Bonhoffe"r wrote an essay that expresser] his c()ncept of church
resnonsi":)ili ty toward Jews.
As one migh t
ex~ect,
spoke ()f aiding the victims of a repressive
Christ-like manner.
Bonhoffer
Gove~n~ent
But the unusual and somev"hat
in a
startlin~
feature of this essay was its apparent call for direct action
against :3uch an oljpressor.
Likening Naticr:>mal SocialsY'l to a
rolling 'Nheel which cY'ushed everything in its "!lath, Bonh'offer
urged th:; church "not sim;;ly to biniJ the wounds of the victi>Yls
beneath the wheel, but also to put a s;Joke in the wheel itself.,,16
How Bonn(i'ffer intended this snoke to be implemented is still
not clear, but it shoulrl. suffice to say that few individuals
weY'e willin.;; to
ma~~e
such a strong publi c rlefense of the Jews.
Bonhoffer also had disputes with
on the ,Jewish 1uestion.
Confessin~
Church leaders
As the Aryan Clause began to gain
aCC8!)tance in seveonal syn()ds, Bonhnffer believed that sch-ism
was necessary to
nrese~ve
the
-inte~r-lty
or the church
ele~ents
op)osed to Hitler.
You h3.ve stated that any Church which introduce r'1
the Aryan Clauses ceases thereby to be a Christian
Church.... I ask you in the naY'le of many frienrls,
ministers, ani students to let us know whether you
consider it p()ssibl( to remain in a Church which
has ceased to be a Christian church ... l~
58
30nhbffe~
also had disagreements with NiemBller over the signi-
ficance of the Jew1.sh persecutions.
According to Bethge,
~Jiemoller
did not consider antj-Semitism a major issue and refused to
f~on
t~ke
irresolution
it shoul r: be stated th<i.t Eonh"nffe:- ':ns 'lctive in
?i~Vllly,
~mi~r6s.
helping Jewish
~hile
serving as
pasto~
in London, he
established a special collection for ':"'elief of refu';ees in England. 1 'l
imMinent measures against the Jews.
his sisi;pr' Sabi ne
?cn r1c
Realizing the danger that
':2.mily faced by remaininp; in Germany, he
assisted their esca;e to Switzerland.
of Bishop Bell, the Leibholzes were
and
ad.iu~;t
to life in exile.
Throush the efforts
~ble
to rind employmertt
After BonhoffeY'
beC~J11e
i'wn1vcd
in the conspiracy, he rlayed a role in the "U-7 'flot."
Originally
c1esi~;ne:l
swells-:1
to hel;-l seven .Tewish ci tizens (the numbe:'
depended on skillful
~L tl
1'1 i
3
1 ;)1 ~ J
'--'(.,
~ ;~"1
i
2. l
. .:-- ,
--------------------
!
-
decel~ion
Ol~
~30on
}estnpo I,erso:1nel to £'ac:ilit;'lte
59
,-'
it vms a
1~ealizati0n
l')ved .20nhoffer extenrled this concern t·:)
suffering under Hi tIer,
material needs.
"~onc",et:mess
sought to 'l_lc:
Cl'1J
3ill sunmed ur
is not
0ne~3
of the hRrdships it posed .f0r the
\'l~'1ere
:~-eak
t~18~T
Bonh~ffer's
he
f')l' all Jews
~'afet~T
concer~
;-,nd
thusly:
Bonhn,ffer' c()!Y!es out in his
theolo~y;
.t ' .is ':In
, ~Y'e h_ e c;oe:3 F
. l . ,,?l
L
::>m:10':=C~ an~1 ;'les i ~3t:m '; e
------------------------
~
vO
Rchi~eved
r:'oubtf1l1 that Bonhcffer 'v()ulcl have
nativ(~
G(?rr~1any.
But it 'das
precisel~l
:l.n~.r
-1
~-'
0,
1• +u
• '"
10
fa'T:8 011 tsi'1 e '1 is
his decision to
~o
beyo:1r1
resi sta:!1ce . and ent er act i ve cO!1s,i '~C{cy that makes hi s story
had
fOI~
;lestroyinq; the evil that
At first,
lea~eY's
J3()nh0:~e~~
occur at all, should be f()ught on
c;':"8V;
lead to total ruin.
Sl_'''1ed ':lith ~:l c;reat majority of chuY'ch
on how to Gu')ose Hitler.
Bonhoffe:::' 'Iuickly
CO,(l,'
Resis~ance,
i: it were t()
theolo~ical
grounds.
djs~:1.-tisfier'l
3ut
·'.'1i:h this position, for
injustices occurring outside of the church were being ignored.
Indifferent reaction
frust!:"'a ted hiTL
t~_·
,rev/ish :'ersecutiol1s ::articul.:1rly
Gy·adtnlly. 30'1h'o ffer ':'82.1 iz ed
-~-------------'.- -
th?~ t
0
sitio:l
60
',;ithin the chllrch
\!RS
too limiten
pr8-w~r yea~s,
strate;i l3s to
~ere
his
resi~,t
Dublj~
the
s~eeches
self-cent9~~e:1
Bonh~ffer
Hitlef~
and
a~'1d
eM~loye4
to be effect'vr-..
v~riou3
regime.
writin~s.
U~c~m~roMising
1:'he
in tone,
n~~eviously
the church by refusing tJ conr;llct
c1p.:ic~1
tantly that of
Scoffej at as being innractical
Dln~ra!
. I'lJ'l
this idea of a
In
-'...J,
serv~ces.
ee~eral
~tri~e
in Norway with a surprisins
late~
By the
yeal~
1 'IJ'I,
Bon~'l~ffer,
rlutics, !lost imnor-
was used nine years
de~ree
of success.
1i1(e nany of his conteMT)oraries,
felt that war was inevitable.
others
suL~'ere'l.
ri8ht to take nart in the restoration of Ghristian Ijfe in
61
J.8rmany after the
'1 S
t'ne
0_f'
-l.~~la.
;va~
+
presen~
if I did not share with my nation the
tl'm.e.,,22
The sacrifice of his own comfort
for the sake of hi s fe 110\"1 countrYMen epi tomiz es his bel ief
0
f
acting a3 Christ w0ulcl, "foY' 0thers."
Ctlring this tiMe, BonhBffer was a,proached by meMbers of
his fal'1i1y about Y!articinatinf'; in the burc:;eoning 7:::l.ot to remove
Hi tl el~.
Undoubt ed ly, the d ecis ion '.'Vas an;oniz in:,; for hi)"} because
it would renuire the repujiation of deep-rooted pacifistic tenets.
Indeed, violence was
somethin~
Sneakin~
confe~ence
at the
lan~
long abhorred by
in
1~J4,
Bonh~ffer.
he declared that
Ch~i~
tians "may not use Vlea!Jons against one another because they
knovv
in so doin::; they are aiminp; those weapons at Christ
tha-~
himself. "2J
broke
ou-~,
And 'Nhen asked by a student v"hat he would do if war
BDnhoffer replied, "I pray God will
strength not to take up arr1S. ,,24
~i ve
me the
At various ti.mes ouring his
life, he made playw to journey to Inoia with the pj'rrpose of
studyinG political nacifism under Mohandas Gandhi.
Bore ,ressing
matters, however, forced him to shelve this idea several times.
Abeccror'lbie also indicates that there may have beeYl a
theological conflict in BOYlhoffer's decision to enter the
consniracy.
On the one hand, Bonh8ffer saw the Christian
comMunity as OYle existing in the wor:l.d.
~roclaiM
Its
~ission
was to
Christ, ano to resist Satan's attenpts to subvert this
':' c:::
missian.~J
On the other hand, Bonh5ffer's Lutheran backgrouno
62
~laced
a~
emnhasis on the
soverei~nty
of God.
Accordingly,
all gove:-nments were subj'ect to His lordshin and served His
ends.
go~d
Therefore,
tyne of resistRnce, despite its ostensibly
~ny
intentions, would go against God's will.
believes the conflict vras
ne~e,:,
Abercrombie
cesolved in Bonhoffer's wri tings,
'l
,26
an,d th us th e d l_ef'lma
remalns.
Yet Bonhoffer Droceeded to be8in what he called "the great
mas')ueraile of evil,"?'?
Jy this sta{';e of his thinking, he had
clecided =_t was time to ste" further
resistor to that of active
f:..~om
~articipant
his cole
0:
~8.ssive
in removing Hitler.
Bethge rEmarks:
It seemed to him appropriate in a situation into
which a 1Jresumptuous German had m~neuvered his
country ... that the natriot had to perform what
in normal times is the action o~ a sco~ndrel.
".l'reason'l had bec<;H'le,true nateiotism_, and w~~t
was nO!."'T!lally pa trlot1S TYj had become treason.
In a s-peE!ch at "iaYLe State Uni.versi ty, Jill stated:
rhi~:, at least, is hO'N I interlJret Bonhoef:el" S
turni ng to the :}l2we:l1~ cons ~L~8.cy . He hacl done
h i.s 1)est
~.
t.)
~,JYlC~
t~)
~~~)~3_'12l
r~C S
i
:~~
t
p",--l-(·--~.
':;-,)''-1 ~("-,:~ 1"'~1::;-
;',:: J~"~. -.'~ ~~.l.':' .~~i.l~ :''''~}-'' -:)~~
~3'[<~
r";:-:tl "'~~~l
2,t
.:.~,~::
1.8.st he
~'Yl~~!
:1
:.cc .': ~1.·_~
S8.\"r ~}1::'~) ~;'lC,l1
.~ :'e~1.t Yll.1.isrlnce
to the state, and he weariej of kee~in~ its hU9
in tune. He went to peonl e VJho \vanted act ion. - r;
But how did
BonhBffe~
reconcile these nlans with his
and theological tenets?
Essentially, he thought
have to subordinate his own beliefs--even
hi~
th~~
•
....ct.
~.
:)qCL-'. l3 [,lC
he would
,wn ryastoral
reputaticn--for the sake of removing the oppressive evil that
Hitle~
stood for.
He believed it was
------------------.-----
necess~~y
to senarate
6)
the Nazi machinery from his own beloveri Germany.
His action,
trophic, rule by Hitler, these men sec'Cetly l,lottc'1
~o
e1 i~1ir~a te the ./uhrer.
As part of this scheJ:le, Bonh·offer
·'.!1
assigned the tas 1-;:
informer; in
the
the Abwehr.
--
of~:1tlJ.c-'i_rv;
l~eali ty,
Ostensibly, he was
jnf:'0:-T13.tion anel serving as Rn
he vlould be
resi~tance mnve~cnt
T;1:~'1S1X'~e::;
t~~yin::-:
to"U"l
U
in other countries.
';ihil e thel"e, the
secret journeys continuerl.
Switzerlani,
No~way,
His assi8nnents lert him into
and Sweden.
In
:··~orw3.y,
Donhof::er- ano
fellow agents were sent to investigate a civil disturbance and
---,.-------------_
...
64
l'here they secretly uY''3ed the
in creating nroblems.
~hY'1Ne9;ians
to rersii3t
Dur"l.n<:>; the Swedish visit, he
encountered Bishon Dell.
!ro~
this visit, Bell
~as
lr"1GX n ecte,-lly
able to
obtain names and info"Y'mation about the GecnaYl P.:esist'J.Ylce moverlent.
He theYl
~re:-::e'1ted
the inforrrJation to ioreie;'1 r,1inisteY'
Anthony :;:Wen, '::ho !-'oli tely refused to consi(ler a'1Y aiel to S11Ch
grouDs because the~e had been no evidence of overt resistance. JJ
Fe:..~haps
-~he
IrlOst risky !")lots 30nh'offer ',,"as involved vlith were
two assassination attempts in Febcuary and
~arch
of 1143.
A'1
officer '1aneel Fabian von Schlabrendorff placed on Hitler's Dlane
an
eXDlo~3ive,
~etonate.
sac"Y'ificl~
which,
for reasons never determined, failecl to
The next month, Major q. F. Gersdorff attempted to
his own life s.s a sort of "walking bonb"
?uhr'e:', s visit to an arsenal.
Unexnecteelly, Hi tler stayed
only briefly, and the najor was unable to get close
exnlode the device.
the
Ab~e}}r:
during the
enou~h
to
Des,ite the failure of these missioYls,
was able to cover its tracks sufficiently, and
Bonhoffer and his :ellow consnirators ','fere able to eS cane
,ianrrer.
,
- ,
It ','las the 10ng-sta"1ding rivalry between the Gestapo a!1rl
the
i1l?l!~~hr
over the cont['ol of information that led to the
conspirato:'s' undoi!1g.
Conflict a!1d jealousy were frenuent
between Admiral Ca:1aris and the S.S. leaders of the l{eich
Security Head Office; as a result, the Gestano attem')ted to find
a!1Y evidence of
'Nro!1gdoin~
that would dana9"e
the Abwehr.
::>
---
On
65
d-J.bious cha':'ges of irregularities involving a currency
~ather
exchan~e,
the Gestano arrested Dohnanyi, and a few
Bonhoffer himself.
th~rough
but a
~ours
later,
The evidence against them was not damning,
investigation of Dohnanyi's naners in
1~44
revealed a documented renort of the atrocities of the Hitler
~egir.1e.
In this "chronicle; o:r
several
conspirato~s
ani a
ShaY:'1E'" J 1
were the names of
of their activities since the
su~mary
first inklings of the rIot in 1')3S.
It was this jocur.1ent that
proved to be a decisive factor in breaking the
the
Ab~Q;lr:
and
ViaS
a
autho~ity
of
death warrant that le0 to the
vi~tual
execution of Deck, Canaris, and oster.
Bonhoffer was i:-nprisoned at Tegel during much of 1 '1431 ')44.
:::1 addition to gaining the
he wrote extensively on his iclt?8.:3
::::-:
:>;' 01"
l
he
}I:.':..
W;:J.S
in.:; ·)f the
~ohnanyi
role in thro consni"acy.
:rinz
AI~recht
at Buche:l'.'fal
caI1t~1
r
}.
fG:~
of many imnates,
a "relic;i8nless" Chris-
siven a trial c1uri;w; which he vias able to
defend himself against the
fi'1(~
friend'3hi~)
~estano
rloc'J..f'le'1ts
~re
was
allegations; the subsenuent
unfort~L1a
tra:'lsfey':.~e:1
tely
tCJ the
Strasse, 8'1d from there to the
0'1
A~)Y'~lf,
in~1 i:;~ted
hj s
Se~+~Clro
concen~ration
i-~l
Cq~~
1145, he -:!as execute·i at a Gesta"o
i'1 ._i'lossenberg.
------------
66
Practicality was at the very heart of Bonhbffer's
theology.
Church leaders who fought only to preserve the
inviolability of their own positions disillusioned him.
To
Bonhc~ffer,
such atti tudes were selfish and hypocritical.
It was wrong for the church to ignore the inherent evil
of anti- Sem:1tism and political persecution.
Bonhoffer's
decision to enter the Abwehr was an agonizing one, for it
required the abandonment of reputation and personal
principles.
But, to Bonhoffer, a refusal to do anything
about the growing evil of National Socialism would make
a mockery of his Christian witness.
Ultimately, this
conviction would cost Bonhoffer his life.
man who "practiced what he preached."
------------------_.-
He was truly a
In aiding the mission of the Confessing Church,
NiemollE~r,
Barth, and Bonhoffer worked tirelessly.
Al-
though their clerical training was similar in many respects, these men utilized unique skills and talents
that made their roles particularly valuable.
In their
aggregate sum, these talents gave the Confessing Church
a semblance of balance and completeness.
Niemoller can be perceived as a sort of public
relations man.
His status as war hero lent considerable
prestige to his position.
The masses who came to hear
him obviously felt comfortable with his
integrity and patriotism.
unquestionable
Sermons, not abstruse theological
writings, were Niemoller's principal tool.
Simple and direct
in contE!nt, they were readily understood and greatly appreciated by the laity.
In commanding grass roots support
and loyalty, Niem5ller was without peer.
Barth
provided the intellectual and theological
underpir..ning of the movement.
Keenly perceptive of the
dangers of National Socialism, he urged church leaders to
resist its practices.
As author of such influential
documents as Theologische Existenz heute and the Barmen
Confession, Barth defined the essence of the church
struggle for the entire world.
While he was active in the Confessing Church, Bonhoffer played the role of diplomat and teacher.
His
influence in ecumenical circles was necessary in providing international support for the Confessing Church.
68
After his return to Germany in 1935. Bonhoffer operated
a
clandE~stine
seminary at Finkenwalde.
A very popular
teacher, Bonhoffer won his students' devotion and gratitude.
Of course, there were important differences that
separa tE!d these three individuals.
Many of these differ-
ences have been discussed--class differences. political
leanings, perceptions of the proper relationship between
church a.nd state, and c Cl1.siderati ons of the Chri stian ',S
responsibility In a hostile environment.
p~ising.
Upon
It is not sur-
then, to find incidents of personal clashes.
meetin~
Niemoller for the first time, Barth was
dismayed by the pastor's "Prussian" Clualities. 1 Niemoller
and Bonhoffer had disputes over the significance of
the Jewish question.
In addition, Bonhoffer was dis-
pleased by Niemoller's congratulatory telegram to the
Fuhrer. noting in his diary that Germany's withdrawal
from the League of Nations "has brought the danger of war
very much closer.,,2
Barth and Bonhoffer were both prone
to disputes over theological issues, especially during
the final years of their relationship.
The urgency of the situation, however, forced these
men to relegate such differences to a minor role.
Reali-
zing the need for presenting a strong front against the
Nazi s, Barth. Ni emoller, and Bonhoffer developed
stron,<:~;
..1-
{_
furt~ e"':r(es~td. ~'\lS se>,\\p"It'''\: :
ti es of cooperation.ln a remark to Niemoller/" "You haven',t
the
leas~
idea what theology is all about, and yet how can
69
I complain?
things!")
For you think and see and do the right
Eventually, these men became the most uncom-
promising of the elements of church opposition.
paid a high price for their convictions:
They
exile, im-
prisonment, and, in Bonhoffer's case, death.
It is significant to note that the reputation and
influence of Niemoller, Barth, and Bonhoffer increased
tremendously in the post war era.
mental in the
draftin~
NiemEller was instru-
of the Stuttgart Statement of
Guilt, which was an admission of the church's failure to
resist Hitler wholeheartedly.
He later served as president
of the World Council of Churches.
Barth became a signi-
ficant advocate of nuclear disarmament and was widely
honored for his achievements: in theology.
Bonhoffer
became a twentieth-century martyr whose writings still
create tremendous impact.
Books such as The Cost of Disci-
pleship and Life Together, highly regarded in both theological and secular circles, have made Bonh~ffer one of the
rest influential theologit'(lls of recent times.
Had all Protestants responded to the church struggle
in the manner of Niemoller, Barth, and Bonhoffer, the
outcome of the Kirchenkampf may very well have been
different.
Despite diverse baCkgrounds and attitudes,
these men were united in their unflinching defiance of
National Socialism.
were few and divided.
Unfortunately, their followers
In the final analysis, the lives of
these three men stand as models for what effective church
resistance might have been.
Notes
Introduction
1 Frederick O. Bankovsky, "The German State and. Protestant Elite," in The German Church Struggle and the
Holocaust, ed. Franklin H. Littell and Hubert G. Locke
(Detroit: dayne State Uniifersity Press, 1974), p. 125.
A Brief SurIey of the German Church Struggle
1 Peter Matheson, The Third. Reich and the CHristian
ChurcheE: (Grand Rapi ds, llTi chigan : Nilliam B. Eerclmans,
1981), p. 39.
2
I bid.
3 Ibicl., p. 49.
Martin r<iemoller
1 Eberhard Busch, ~arl Barth. trans. John Bowden
(Philaaelphia: Fortress Press. 1976), p. 234.
,..
L..
Uietmar Schmidt, Pastor Niem5ller, trans. Lawrence
Nilson (New York: Uoubletiay ana Co., 1959), p. 19.
3 :Vlartin Niemoller, From J-Boat to Pulpit, trans. D.
Hastie ;:·mith (Chicago:ilillett, Clark and Co., 1937), p. lt6.
4 Ibid., p. 47.
5 Ibid. , p. 1216 1 bid. ,. p. 128.
7
~:chmiut
, Pastor Niemoller, p. 6j.
8 C:larissa Start Davidson, God's Man: The Story of
Fastor Niemodlell"'" (New York: Ives,'lashburn, Inc., 1969),
pp. l LI-6-·1 i+7, 149.
9 Nie:noller, From U-Boat to Pulpit, p. 97.
10 Ibid. , p. 112.
11 Ibi l . , p.
1'35·
12 Ibid. , p.
153·
13 Da'Jirlson, God's iYIan, p. 34.
2
14 1:!,rns
~
t C. Helmreich, The German Churches under
Hitler (Letroit: Hayne =tate University Press, 1979), p. 129.
15 Ibiu. , p. 139.
16 Ibid. ,
17 I biu .
19 IbiL.. , p. 149.
19 Schmidt, Fastor Niemoller, p. 94.
20 J. S. Conway, The Nazi Persecution of the Churches,
19JJ-4~ (New York:
Basic Books, 1969), p. 74.
21 D~vidson, God's Man, p. 66.
2:2 RicharG. Grunberger, A .social History of the Thiru
Reich (Lonuon: Neidenfeld ana Nicholson, 1971), p. 453.
2)
Davidson, Gou's Man, p. 61.
24 ~artin Niemoller, Here Stand I
burn (Cr.icapo:
2.5 Ib"lU,.•
·r
~o
,
!, trans. Jane LvrnWillett, Clark and Co., 1937), p. 195.'
p.
19hc).
Ibid., pp.' 19 6 -197.
'L:7 "~rthur C. Cochrane, "The Ylessage of Barmen for
C ontempcrary Church Hi story," in The German Church Strup:rgle, p.,zol.
:9 Davidson, Gou's Man, p. 61.
29 Ibid.
30 Ibid., p. 10::.
31 Eberhard Bethge, Dietrich Bonhoeffer: Man of lisioR,
Man of Courage (New York: Harper anJ Row, 1970), p. 236.
32
I bid.
33 Schmiut, Pastor Niem~ller, p. 155.
34 Bonko·vsky, "The Protestant Eli te," pp 0 129, 1360
35 ~~artin Niemoller, God Is My Fuehrer (Ne~v York:
Philosophical Library anLi Alliance Book Compa:ny, noll.),
p.
161.
)6 J;avidson, God's Man, po
940
----_._---_
...
3
37 Schmidt, Pastor Niemoller, pp. 109, 110.
38 Davidson, God's Man, p. 94.
39 Ibid. , p. 99.
40 Ibid. , p.
100.
LH
Bethe::e, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, p. 569.
42 Ibid.
4)
Helmreich, The Churches under Hitler, p. 132.
Karl Barth
1 Busch, Karl Barth, pp. 63-4 3.
2
ginia:
Karl Barth, How I Changed My Mind (Richmonti, JirJohn Knox Press, 1966), p. 21-
J Busch, Karl Barth, p. 81.
4 Ibid.
5 Barth, How I Changed My Mind, p. 25.
6 Georges Casalis, Portrait of Karl Barth (New York:
Doubleday and Co., 196J), p. 60.
7Clarence L. Abercrombie III, "Barth and Bonhoeffer:
Resistance to the Jnjust State," Religion in Life (October 197~), p. 346.
8
Busch, Karl Barth,P. 190.
9 Ibid., p. 218.
10 Karl Barth, The German Church Strue::gle (Richmond,
'Tirginia.: John Knox Press, 1965), p. 4111 Ibid., p. 56.
12Helmreich, The Churches under Hi tIer, p. 139.
13 Busch, Karl Barth, p. 21 3 .
14 Franklin ii. :Ui ttell, "Church Struggle and Holocaust," in The German Church Struggle, pp. 14-15.
15 Casalis, Portrait of Barth. p. 54.
16 Barth, The German Church Struggle, p. 20.
4
17 Busch. ~arl Bartb. p. 217.
13 Ibid., p. 189.
19 Bonkov'sky, "Protestant Elites.
II
p.
129.
20 Arthur Frey. Cross and 3wastika, trans. j. Strathearn
,~cNab
(Lonc.lon:
Student Christian Movement Press,
1933), p. 140.
21 Barth, How I Changed My Mind, p. 46.
22 Busch, Karl Barth. p. 223.
23 Ibic.l. , p. 242.
24 Ibiu .. p. 254.
25 Barth, How I Changed My Mind. p. 47.
26 Cochrane,
~~7
:,:3
"Message( of Barmen," p. 201.
Busch, Karl .3arth. p. 235.
Ibid. , p. 248.
29 Ibid. , p. 290.
30 Conway. Nazi Persecution of the Churches. p. 233.
31 Abercrombie, "Resistance to the unjust State,"
pp. 3Lt8-·349.
3~ John H. Yoder, Karl Barth and the Problem of War
(Nashville, Tennessee: Abingdon Press. 1970), p. 74.
33 Helmreich, The Churches under Hitler, p. 2)0.
34 Barth, How I Changed. My :'lJ.ina, p. 5'3.
35 Theodore A. Gill, "What Can America Learn from the
German Church StruFgle," in The German Church Struggl e, p. 286.
Dietrich Bonh5ffer
1 Eberhard Bethge, Costly Grace, trans. Rosaleen Ockenuen (San Francisco: Harner and. Row, 1979), p. 25.
2
Bethge, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, p. 34.
3 Bethge, Costly Grace, p. 33.
4
Ibid .• p. lt5.
,--_._--_.-
..
5
5 'I' h eo <..i 0 reA. Gill, o..::~l'I=e,;.:;m:....::o,---"f;....:o:..:ro........:a~i:...:.Vl=o..;..v..=i...:;e,-:---,...;;,A.::.-.:S=hc.:..o~r-=-t-=L=i,-=f~e
of :Uietrich Bonhoeffer (Ne\N York: The it1acmillan Company,
1971), pp. 76-77.
;-
o Donald Goddard, The Last Days of Dietrich Bonhoeffer
(San Fr2.ncisco: Harper and Rmv, 1976), p. ;:::'g. Goddard's
book presents a unique problem in that some of the dialogues
are fictionalized. The factual content, however, is
basically correct.
7 Gill, Memo for a Movie, p. 92.
8
Bethge, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, p. 191.
9 Abercrombie, "Resistance to the Jnjust State," p. J5g.
10 Bethge, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, p.
11 Abercrombie,
627.
"R3sistance to the Unjust State," p. 354.
12 Bethge, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, p. 193.
13 Goddard, The Last Days of Bonhoeffer, p. 33.
14 Bethge, Costly Grace, p. 77.
15 Bethge, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, p. 20 6 .
16 I bid., p. 208.
17 Sabine Leibholz-Bonhoeffer, The Bonhoeffers:
Portrait of a Family (.l~ew Yort: St. Nlartin s Press,
t
1971), :p. 1-1-6.
18 BethEe, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, p. 23 6 .
19 Gill, Memo for a Mo~ie, p. 119.
20 GOlldard, The Last [)-=i.ys of Bonhoeffer, p.
25.
21 Gill, Memo for a Movie, p. 92.
22 Bethge, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, p. 559.
23 I bi d ., p. 313.
:: Li· I bi d., p. 3 1LJ..
2)
Abercrombie, "Resistance to the unjust State," p. 354.
26 Ibid., p. 356.
~7 John D. Godsey, Preface to Bonhoeffer:
and Two of His Shorte~ Nritings (Fhiladelphia:
Press, 1979), p. 5.
The Yian
Fortress
6
28 3ethge, ~ietrich Bonhoeffer, p. 579.
~':9 Gill, "vI/hat Can America Learn from the Church
0t rugg 1 e.,
? " p . .r85
:.
.
..::>
30 Bonkov·sky, "Protestant Elites," p. 11}5.
31 3ethge, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, p. 57 6 .
Conclusion
1 Busch. Karl Barth, p. ~3J.
Bethge, Dietrich 30nhoeffer, p. ;53.
3 C~salis, Portrait of Barth, p. 66.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Abercrombie, Clarence L. III.
"Barth and Bonhoeffer:
Resistance to the Unjust State," Religion in Life
(October, 1973), pp. 344-360.
Barth, Karl. How I Changed My Mind.
John Knox Press, 1966.
Richmond, lirginia:
Barth, Karl. The German Church Conflict.
ginia: John Knox Press, 1965.
Richmond, 'Iir-
Bethge, Eberhard. Costly Grace. Translated by Rosaleen
Ockenden. San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1979.
Bethge, Eberhard. Dietrich Bonhoeffer: Man of 'lision,
Man of Courage. New York: Harper & Row, 1970.
Bonhoeffer, Dietrich. Letters and Papers From Prison.
Edited by Eberhard B>thge. London: SCM Press Limited,
1971..
Busch, Eberhard. Karl Barth. Translate<l by John Bowden.
Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1976.
Casalis, Georges. Portrait of Karl Barth.
Doubleday and Co., 1963.
New York:
Com'Jay, J. S. The Nazi Persecution of the Churches, 1933~~.
New York: Basic Books, 1969.
Davidson, Clarissa Start. God's Man: The Story of Pastor
Niemoeller. New York: Ives Washburn, Inc., 1959.
Frey, Arthur. Cross and Swastika. Translated by J.
Strathearn McNab. London: Student Christian
Movement Press, 1958.
Gill, Theodore A. Memo for a Movie:
A Short Life of
~~~~-=~~~~~~~~
Dietrich Bonhoeffer. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1971.
Goddard, Donald. The Last Days of Dietrich Bonhoeffer.
San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1976.
Godsey, John D ... Preface to Bonhoeffer: The i'vlan and Two of
His Shorter Writings. Philadelphia: Fortress
Press, 1979.
Helmreich, Ernst Christian. The German Churches under
Hitler. Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1979.
Littell, Franklin H. and Locke, Hubert G., eds. The German
Church Struggle and the Holocaust. Detroit: Wayne
State Uni~ersity Press, 1974.
Matheson, Peter. The Third Reich and the Christian Churches.
Grand rtapids, :v1ichigan: -IIi lliam B. Eerdmans, 1981.
Niem6ller, Martin. From U-Boat to Pulpit.
Commander D. Hastie Smith. Chicago:
an d Co., 1937.
Translated by
Willett, Clark,
Niemoller, Martin. God is My Fuehrer. Translated by Jane
Lynburn. New York: Philosophical Library and
ALLiance Book Corpora ti on, n. d.
Niemoll!~r,
burn.
Martin. Here Stand I: Translated by Jane LymChicago: Willett, Clark, and Co., 1937.
Schmidt, Dietmar. Pastor Niemoller. Translated by Lawrence 'Nilson. New York: Doubleday & Co., 1959.
Yoder, John H. Karl Barth and the Problem of War.
Nashville, Tennessee: Abingdon Press, 1970.